+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 3 5 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 83

Thread: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

  1. Link to Post #41
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    15th January 2018
    Location
    Arizona
    Language
    English
    Posts
    538
    Thanks
    911
    Thanked 2,145 times in 461 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    Quote Posted by waves (here)
    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    Quote Posted by greybeard (here)
    Anyone who thinks the number of deaths being attributed to the virus are accurate are in denial.
    There is no single cause for these deaths, all kinds of causes are being linked under the umbrella of Covid-19
    A single cause for all these -- give me a break.

    I think that information put out by Jon Rappoport, posted by quite a few, is self explanatory and true.
    Thanks to onawah, Luke and others for painstakingly pointing this out.
    I would also point to the David Icke video that was banned but available--saved on Avalon.
    Not a follower of David but he is making sense and researches properly.

    Chris
    ~~~

    Chris, please listen. There are different ways of being in denial.

    It doesn't matter if the current global scenario is caused by a new virus or by a magic spell. It changes nothing at all.

    One person I know very well indeed told me a few minutes ago about their friend in the Scottish Borders who's just about to die. They're waiting for the news any day, any hour.

    This is real. You're arguing about angels on a pin.

    There are two things to pay attention to:
    1. There's a real situation out there.
    2. There's a real agenda behind it.
    Very little else matters. A lot of people are posting on the forum about things that really just aren't important at all in the context of the far, far bigger picture.

    Yes it does matter if you're helping this agenda by believing and repeating the lies it's using. Why wouldn't it matter? I don't see why you seem to be in denial of that.

    I don't see anything Chris is in denial about in his summary that you quoted, nor do I see how your response clarifies anything.

    YES 'there is a real situation and agenda out there' but what the hell else are we trying to do here but compare evidence and sort the lies from the truth to be able to make correct decisions for ourselves, our families and our world.

    Chris is obviously not in denial there's a 'real situation'.
    Chris is obviously not in denial there's a 'real agenda'.

    So what is he in denial about to you for just continuing to try to to intelligently sort the truth from lies like 1000's of us ... who even feel it's the most important thing to do for our lives right now!!!? I really, really don't see where any denial is for doing this, does anyone else?

    In other words, what 'angels on a pin' do you feel are wrong to talk about?


    …Brilliant....

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Luke Holiday For This Post:

    DSKlausler (16th April 2020), pueblo (17th April 2020)

  3. Link to Post #42
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    15th January 2018
    Location
    Arizona
    Language
    English
    Posts
    538
    Thanks
    911
    Thanked 2,145 times in 461 posts

    Default CV 19 Mortality Rates: A statistical analysis

    Hello,

    I was motivated to fact check after hearing, reading and watching claims of alleged CV 19 death numbers exaggerations - in terms of terms cause of death dx on death certificates

    So I have compiled 3 tables listing the Worldside Mortality rates for 2017, 2018 and 2020 up to 4/15/20. If the reports of bodies overflowing from hospital worldwide are correct, then we should see a spike in the mortality rates.

    If the CV 19 numbers of deaths are being manipulated then the mortality rates should be relatively unchanged over last few years


    I will hold my judgement for a later time.


    Comments, discussion are encouraged

    And what do you think social distancing so far?:

    Attached Images  
    Attached Files
    Last edited by Luke Holiday; 17th April 2020 at 19:42.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Luke Holiday For This Post:

    pueblo (17th April 2020)

  5. Link to Post #43
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    15th January 2018
    Location
    Arizona
    Language
    English
    Posts
    538
    Thanks
    911
    Thanked 2,145 times in 461 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    Quote Posted by Elainie (here)
    This is the test I got

    https://www.vibrant-america.com/covid-19/
    Hello Elaine,

    Thank you for sharing the CV 19 test that is now being recommended by the CDC to the medical profession.

    I can say for a fact that there is currently a lot of discussion/debate on Naturopathic medical doctor chat rooms/groups as to the validity/implications of the test, some of which is expressed in the:


    Following is the Regulatory statement about the test from the link you provided

    The test has been validated but FDA’s independent review of this validation is pending. Negative results do not rule out SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly in those who have been in contact with the virus. Follow-up testing with a molecular diagnostic should be considered to rule out infection in these individuals. Results from antibody testing should not be used as the sole basis to diagnose or exclude SARS-CoV-2 infection or to inform infection status. Positive results may be due to past or present infection with non-SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus strains, such as coronavirus HKU1, NL63, OC43, or 229E. Not for the screening of donated blood.

    The problems I have with this test are the proposed: work restrictions, freedom limitations and vaccine implications being recommended for people who test positive.

    I am confident in saying that the AB test is only valid for determining exposure - nothing else.


    (Just to be clear, I am not saying that I disagree in anyway with your choice to be tested


    Blessings Luke
    Last edited by Luke Holiday; 17th April 2020 at 03:45.

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Luke Holiday For This Post:

    greybeard (17th April 2020), Philippe (23rd April 2020), pueblo (17th April 2020), Reinhard (25th April 2020)

  7. Link to Post #44
    United States Moderator Sue (Ayt)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd December 2016
    Language
    English
    Posts
    2,554
    Thanks
    28,310
    Thanked 20,530 times in 2,552 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    Quote Posted by Elainie (here)
    This is the test I got

    https://www.vibrant-america.com/covid-19/
    I may have missed it, but did you get your results?
    Thanks
    "We're all bozos on this bus"

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Sue (Ayt) For This Post:

    Reinhard (25th April 2020)

  9. Link to Post #45
    United States Avalon Member Elainie's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th September 2013
    Location
    Boulder, CO
    Posts
    836
    Thanks
    5,069
    Thanked 5,546 times in 787 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    Quote Posted by Luke Holiday (here)
    Quote Posted by Elainie (here)
    This is the test I got

    https://www.vibrant-america.com/covid-19/
    Hello Elaine,

    Thank you for sharing the CV 19 test that is now being recommended by the CDC to the medical profession.

    I can say for a fact that there is currently a lot of discussion/debate on Naturopathic medical doctor chat rooms/groups as to the validity/implications of the test, some of which is expressed in the:


    Following is the Regulatory statement about the test from the link you provided

    The test has been validated but FDA’s independent review of this validation is pending. Negative results do not rule out SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly in those who have been in contact with the virus. Follow-up testing with a molecular diagnostic should be considered to rule out infection in these individuals. Results from antibody testing should not be used as the sole basis to diagnose or exclude SARS-CoV-2 infection or to inform infection status. Positive results may be due to past or present infection with non-SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus strains, such as coronavirus HKU1, NL63, OC43, or 229E. Not for the screening of donated blood.

    The problems I have with this test are the proposed: work restrictions, freedom limitations and vaccine implications being recommended for people who test positive.

    I am confident in saying that the AB test is only valid for determining exposure - nothing else.


    (Just to be clear, I am not saying that I disagree in anyway with your choice to be tested


    Blessings Luke

    My doctor is against vaccinations, he did not vaccinate his own children, he is a different type of doctor. I don't have our results yet, it is only for our personal knowledge.

  10. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Elainie For This Post:

    greybeard (17th April 2020), pueblo (17th April 2020), Reinhard (25th April 2020), silvanelf (17th April 2020)

  11. Link to Post #46
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    There was an article today, which I cant find now --where an official admitted that the tests were flawed and would have to be done again.
    Chris
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  12. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    De Christu (21st April 2021), Elainie (23rd April 2020), Philippe (22nd April 2020), Reinhard (25th April 2020)

  13. Link to Post #47
    Avalon Member Hughe's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th November 2010
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    966
    Thanks
    1,129
    Thanked 4,103 times in 806 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    https://www.naturalnews.com/2020-05-...positives.html

    Faulty coronavirus tests: Goat, quail and papaya in Tanzania test positive for COVID-19, raising concerns about false positives

    Sunday, May 10, 2020 by: Arsenio Toledo
    Tags: Africa, Africa CDC, badhealth, badmedicine, badscience, China, coronavirus, coronavirus test, covid-19, false positives, Flu, government, infections, Jack Ma, junk science, outbreak, pandemic, science clowns, superbugs, Tanzania, virus, WHO, World Health Organization

    (Natural News) Coronavirus test kits in Tanzania have raised suspicions about their accuracy. President John Magufuli expressed during an event that he found them so unreliable due to the fact that certain animals and even a fruit have tested positive for COVID-19.

    He further stated that the test kits were imported from overseas, but refused to specify where.

    In order to evaluate the quality of the COVID-19 test kits, security forces in Tanzania obtained non-human samples from a goat, a papaya, a quail and even a sheep. The samples were assigned human names and then shipped off to a laboratory to be tested. Lab technicians who worked on the non-human samples weren’t informed about their true origins.

    The test results showed that the goat, quail and papaya were found positive for COVID-19, which may have serious implications. According to Magufuli, this means some people could have received positive coronavirus test results despite not actually being infected.

    This puts into question the country’s actual number of coronavirus cases. As of press time, the country has 509 reported cases of COVID-19, including 21 deaths. However, the actual number of cases could be higher because Tanzania goes days without providing updates.
    A “dirty game” is going on in Tanzania’s coronavirus testing lab

    Magufuli, who initially downplayed the threat of the coronavirus, suspended the head of testing at Tanzania’s national health laboratory on May 4, one day after he revealed that the lab had tested the non-human samples, noting that there was a “dirty game” going on at the laboratory.

    Hassan Abbas, chief government spokesman of Tanzania, said that the country has formed a team to conduct further investigations on the laboratory that did the tests. They will release the results of their investigations as soon as they are complete. (Related: African coronavirus cases SPIKE by 43 percent – WHO warns that continent could be the “next epicenter” of the pandemic.)

    “The equipment or people may be compromised and sometimes it can be sabotage,” said Magufuli in a speech broadcast through the country’s state-run news outlet.

    Magufuli further cast doubt on the foreign aid Tanzania was receiving, saying that it may not always be “good for this nation” and that they shouldn’t accept all of it.
    Coronavirus test kits donated by Chinese billionaire Jack Ma

    Africa’s testing capacity has expanded sharply since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, with the help of test kits procured from the WHO, the Jack Ma Foundation and other philanthropic organizations.

    Jack Ma, Chinese billionaire and founder of the Alibaba Group, has donated thousands of test kits and protective gear to African nations. John Nkengasong, director of the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC), said that the Jack Ma Foundation had provided them with a lot of coronavirus test kits.

    “We are very instrumental in training, providing training to nearly all countries and providing them with test kits,” said Nkengasong. “We’ve also in the last couple of weeks and months distributed tests from the Jack Ma Foundation that have been validated and proven to be very, very reliable.”

    Nkengasong told journalists that the Africa CDC affirmed that the Tanzanian coronavirus test kits are “working very well.” The World Health Organization (WHO) has also expressed their confidence in the reliability of the test kits.

    When questioned regarding the veracity of the coronavirus tests, Matshidiso Moeti, head of WHO Africa, said that the tests procured through their organization and through the donations made by the Jack Ma Foundation were not contaminated with coronavirus.
    Magufuli turns to alternative sources of aid for coronavirus

    Losing any trust he had in the WHO and the Africa CDC, Magufuli has stated that he was sending a plane to Madagascar to collect an herbal mix that the country was touting as a cure for COVID-19. The herbal mix has not gone through internationally recognized scientific testing.

    President Andry Rajoelina of Madagascar has claimed that the herbal cure, known in the country as Covid-Organics, shows results within a week and that it has already cured two people so far.

    Magufuli, in a speech, said that he was communicating with Madagascar regarding this COVID-19 cure. “They have got a medicine,” he said. “The medicine will be brought in the country so that Tanzanians, too, can benefit.”

    Pandemic.news has the latest news on the COVID-19 pandemic in Africa and the rest of the world.

    Sources include:

    SHTFPlan.com

    Independent.co.uk

    GlobalNews.ca

    WHO.int [PDF]

    VOANews.com

    Reuters.com
    For free society!

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Hughe For This Post:

    De Christu (21st April 2021), greybeard (26th June 2020), Reinhard (26th June 2020)

  15. Link to Post #48
    Canada Avalon Member TomKat's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2017
    Posts
    2,616
    Thanks
    2,694
    Thanked 13,330 times in 2,365 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    According to this article, the covid test tests for immunoglobulins M and G:

    https://www.health.com/condition/inf...-antibody-test

    And according to this article (and many others), immunoglobulins M and G are used by the body to fight multiple diseases:

    https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/...lobulin-test#1

    So what does a positive test for covid mean? Nothing? Seems so.

  16. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to TomKat For This Post:

    Ba-ba-Ra (6th July 2020), greybeard (26th June 2020), pueblo (7th July 2020), Reinhard (26th June 2020), XelNaga (23rd July 2020)

  17. Link to Post #49
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,208
    Thanks
    47,680
    Thanked 116,091 times in 20,639 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    60 MINUTES-Faulty COVID-19 antibody tests now complicating efforts to know reach of virus
    70,487 views•Jun 28, 2020
    585K subscribers

    (Most people won't believe whistleblower stories, but when 60 MINUTES reports on it, they will pay attention.)

    "A 60 Minutes investigation has found that federal officials knew many COVID-19 antibody testing kits had flaws, but allowed them to enter the U.S. market. Sharyn Alfonsi reports.




    Faulty COVID-19 Antibody Tests Now Complicating Efforts to Know Reach of Virus
    Published July 6, 2020
    Vaccine Reaction
    https://thevaccinereaction.org/2020/...each-of-virus/

    "Back in March, the Food and Drug Administration took the unprecedented step of allowing COVID antibody tests to flood the market without review. The tests were billed as a critical tool to access where the virus had spread and who might have immunity. But in the government’s rush to get more people tested quickly, it may have missed the mark. Over the course of a three-month investigation, 60 Minutes has learned that federal officials knew that many of the antibody tests were seriously flawed but continued to allow them to be sold anyway."
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  18. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Ba-ba-Ra (6th July 2020), greybeard (7th July 2020), pueblo (7th July 2020), Tintin (23rd July 2020)

  19. Link to Post #50
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    When Is Humanity Going To Stand Up? - David Icke



    This might not suit the thread.
    Mods feel free to put it elsewhere
    Chris
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    pueblo (7th July 2020)

  21. Link to Post #51
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/pub-forced...-174517671.htm
    lhree pubs forced to close just days after reopening after customers test positive for coronavirus

    Yahoo News UK
    The Lighthouse Inn in Burnham-On-Sea has had to close after one of its customers tested positive for coronavirus. (Google Maps)
    The Lighthouse Inn in Burnham-On-Sea has had to close after one of its customers tested positive for coronavirus. (Google Maps)

    At least three pubs have closed their doors just days after reopening because customers tested positive for coronavirus.

    Bars in England welcomed back drinkers at the weekend for the first time since the hospitality sector went into lockdown in March, reopening as part of so-called “Super Saturday”.

    But three establishments have alerted their patrons to say they have to close again after reporting cases of COVID-19.

    The Lighthouse Kitchen and Carvery in Burnham-on-Sea, Somerset, said a customer had tested positive and it was making its way through a list of people who were in the bar on Saturday.

    In a statement posted on Facebook, it added: "All our staff are going to be tested and we will reopen when the time is safe to do so."

    Since when are the tests reliable?
    This is set up to have people in fear of going to pubs.
    Chris
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    celticwarrior (7th July 2020), wondering (7th July 2020)

  23. Link to Post #52
    Avalon Member norman's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th March 2010
    Location
    too close to the hot air exhaust
    Age
    68
    Posts
    8,895
    Thanks
    9,942
    Thanked 55,039 times in 8,168 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    Quote Posted by greybeard (here)

    . . . . . .Since when are the tests reliable?
    This is set up to have people in fear of going to pubs.
    Chris

    It's set up to get everyone on the 'contact tracing' database, which is stage one of making the 'Gates' vaccine compulsory or else you get excluded from almost every aspect of living.

    It's a bit like how we are currently, through our birth certificates, chattle that's owned by the central bankers instead of free humans. Well, we ARE free humans, but the ownership system is still there. Being a data point on the 'contact tracing' database could turn out to be the replacement system if the birth certificate 'ownership' system collapses with a collapse of the current economic system.
    ..................................................my first language is TYPO..............................................

  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to norman For This Post:

    greybeard (7th July 2020), Tintin (23rd July 2020)

  25. Link to Post #53
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    3rd July 2018
    Posts
    4,352
    Thanks
    39,684
    Thanked 33,456 times in 4,332 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    Conversation

    Henry Makow @HenryMakow

    #scamdemic

    This morning, my Uncle went to his knee doctor (in a large well-known city) for a post-op check-up, and his Doctor told him a story...

    "Four colleagues and I did an experiment; we sent in 7 unused tests with fake patient names, and all 7 RETURNED POSITIVE."'

    2:21 AM · Jul 7, 2020·

  26. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Gwin Ru For This Post:

    greybeard (7th July 2020), mountain_jim (7th July 2020), norman (7th July 2020), Philippe (8th July 2020), Tintin (7th July 2020)

  27. Link to Post #54
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    3rd July 2018
    Posts
    4,352
    Thanks
    39,684
    Thanked 33,456 times in 4,332 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    From Jim Stone:


    The Coronavirus test is not credible and likely to be for clandestine brain access.


    They are claiming the virus wrecks the nervous systems of a large percentage of people, leaving lasting neurological problems and brain damage. But I'd like to ask - is it really a virus doing that, or are the tests doing that?

    Folks, the coronavirus tests themselves, in many cases, (there are probably different types) but in many cases they are obviously what is causing the brain damage. Easily explained:

    Many of the tests, (all of them that use the incredibly long "swab") take their samples from the cribriform plate, which is a millimeter thick bone at the top of the nasal cavity that is perforated with many holes that go directly into the brain cavity. These holes are what your olefactory nerves pass through, and there are many (the bone is similar to a coarse screen)


    If you wanted to sabotage someone by planting a clandestine brain virus, nano tech, or plant a chip in someone, this would be the place to do it because perhaps a doctor could get a chip out but individuals certainly never could without perforating that very thin bone (that is not really even bone, it is about half nerves) and anyone attempting to do an extraction from there would likely end up killing themselves.

    Any chemicals, viruses, nanotech or whatever else they wanted to put there will have immediate access to the brain and you can forget about getting that out, once it's in, it is in. It would be literally right on the brain when placed, and go right in. People complain about the tests being excruciatingly painful with the pain lasting for days. For what reason would the tests need to touch the most brain accessible part of the human body? Are the ones that do really tests at all? DNA tests are done with a simple mouth swab, and it's ridiculous to think any virus test - when you supposedly can spread it by coughing, - would not be the same. Something is screwy with these tests. They have GOT TO be fake, (or at least the ones that literally swab the brain are) No wonder why they hurt for days and GEE, getting your olefactory nerves nailed by whatever is on that swab is probably what is causing people to permanently lose their sense of smell.

    COMMON SENSE. I bet you did not know how nasty that test really is. Avoid the test at all costs.

    My first post ever on this topic mocked the entire concept of a coronavirus being massively lethal. The obviously unnecessarily invasive "tests" strongly indicate this is TOTALLY fake and they are not tests at all. That's why we end up getting Kiwi fruit testing positive and people who signed up and left before testing ending up positive, THERE IS NO CORONAVIRUS TEST IF THAT IS HAPPENING, no, they are doing something entirely other than testing and the close proximity to the brain really opens up a reason for questioning what those tests really are. ____________________________

  28. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Gwin Ru For This Post:

    Franny (12th July 2020), greybeard (11th July 2020), leavesoftrees (12th July 2020), onawah (26th December 2020), Tintin (23rd July 2020)

  29. Link to Post #55
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    16th September 2018
    Posts
    1,790
    Thanks
    5,347
    Thanked 10,971 times in 1,706 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    It's just an anecdotal story I read recently on another site.
    But I think it will be of interest to others here...


    "My business partner told me about a couple of his friends that were not sick but wanted to be tested. They are a husband and wife in their fifties. Pinellas County has been offering free testing so they stopped at one of the locations last Friday afternoon. It was very busy. They had to register upon arrival but after a long wait they simply gave up and left without ever being tested.
    Guess who got a call a few hours later notifying them that they were positive for covi$ 19.
    Yep. Never even seen by the person who was doing the testing but still recorded as a positive.
    I don’t know the couple. But I know Andrew. I have worked with him for over 15 years and he has never lied to me about anything as far as I know. He is a happy statist in spite of my best efforts for years to get him to recognize how corrupt his "rulers" are.

    He doesn’t buy the virus bull crap anymore. Thanks government!"

  30. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DaveToo For This Post:

    greybeard (23rd July 2020), onawah (26th December 2020), Tintin (23rd July 2020)

  31. Link to Post #56
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    3rd July 2018
    Posts
    4,352
    Thanks
    39,684
    Thanked 33,456 times in 4,332 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    Ninety out of 144 Covid-19 tests were wrong

    by Robert
    July 22, 2020
    “Ninety out of 144. That is a failure rate of of 68.75%. We cannot trust ANY of the data.”
    – Benjamin Napier
    _______________

    Ninety people who received positive COVID-19 results did not have the virus, according to the Connecticut state Department of Public Health.

    The department said the state public health laboratory uncovered a flaw in one of the testing systems it uses to test for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and 90 of 144 people tested between June 15 and July 17 received a false positive COVID test report. Many are nursing home residents.

    According to the state Department of Health, the errant testing results were “from a widely-used laboratory testing platform that the state laboratory started using on June 15.”

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/med...dpyWVGstMm7xVE

    Thanks to Benjamin Napier for this link

  32. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Gwin Ru For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (23rd July 2020), Ernie Nemeth (23rd July 2020), greybeard (23rd July 2020), mountain_jim (23rd July 2020), onawah (26th December 2020), Tintin (23rd July 2020), wondering (23rd July 2020)

  33. Link to Post #57
    Germany Avalon Member Reinhard's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th February 2011
    Location
    Munich
    Age
    74
    Posts
    142
    Thanks
    65,407
    Thanked 706 times in 127 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    Well.....the question is answered:

    Mercola:

    COVID-19 Testing Scandal Deepens
    Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola

    December 18, 2020



    pcr test reliability
    Story at-a-glance

    Experts are now coming forward in growing numbers denouncing mass PCR testing as foolhardy and nonsensical if not outright criminal
    PCR tests cannot distinguish between “live” viruses and inactive (noninfectious) viral particles and therefore cannot be used as a diagnostic tool. They also cannot confirm that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms as the test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens
    The tests have exceptionally high false result rates. The higher the cycle threshold (CT) — i.e., the number of amplification cycles used to detect RNA particles — the greater the chance of a false positive. Beyond 34 cycles, your chance of a positive PCR test being a true positive shrinks to zero
    Florida recently became the first state to require all labs in the state to report the CT used for their PCR tests
    The SARS-CoV-2 PCR test was developed based on a genetic sequence published by Chinese scientists, not the viral isolate. Missing genetic code was simply made up

    Positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests have been used as the justification for keeping large portions of the world locked down for the past nine months. Not reliable hospitalization or death rates; just positive PCR test numbers — a large portion of which are from people who have no symptoms of actual illness — are the triggers behind the shutdowns.

    Experts are now coming forward in growing numbers denouncing mass PCR testing as foolhardy and nonsensical if not outright criminal. Why? Because we’re now finding that PCR tests rarely tell us anything truly useful, at least not when they’re used as they have been so far.
    Why PCR Tests Are the Wrong Tool to Assess Pandemic Threat

    We now know that PCR tests:

    1. Cannot distinguish between “live” viruses and inactive (noninfectious) viral particles and therefore cannot be used as a diagnostic tool — For this reason, it is grossly misleading to refer to a positive test as a “COVID-19 case.”

    As explained by Dr. Lee Merritt in her August 2020 Doctors for Disaster Preparedness1 lecture, featured in “How Medical Technocracy Made the Plandemic Possible,” media and public health officials appear to have purposefully conflated “cases” or positive tests with the actual illness.

    Medically speaking, a “case” refers to a sick person. It never ever referred to someone who had no symptoms of illness. Now all of a sudden, this well-established medical term, “case,” has been arbitrarily redefined to mean someone who tested positive for the presence of noninfectious viral RNA. As noted by Merritt, “That is not epidemiology. That’s fraud.”

    2. Cannot confirm that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms as the test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.

    3. Have not been established for monitoring the treatment of 2019-nCoV infection.

    4. Have exceptionally high false result rates — The higher the cycle threshold (CT) — i.e., the number of amplification cycles used to detect RNA particles — the greater the chance of a false positive.

    While any CT over 35 is deemed scientifically unjustifiable,2,3,4 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend running PCR tests at a CT of 40.5

    Drosten tests and tests recommended by the World Health Organization are set to a CT of 45. These excessively high CTs guarantee the appearance of widespread (pandemic) infection when infection rates are in fact low.
    The CT Is the Key to the Pandemic

    Many if not most laboratories amplify the RNA collected far too many times, which results in healthy people testing “positive” for SARS-CoV-2 infection and being ordered to take off work and self-isolate for two weeks.

    To optimize accuracy and avoid imposing unnecessary hardship on healthy people, PCR tests must be run at far fewer cycles than the 40 to 45 CTs currently recommended.

    Beyond 34 cycles, your chance of a positive PCR test being a true positive shrinks to zero.

    An April 2020 study6 in the European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases showed that to get 100% confirmed real positives, the PCR test must be run at 17 cycles. Above 17 cycles, accuracy drops dramatically.

    By the time you get to 33 cycles, the accuracy rate is a mere 20%, meaning 80% are false positives. Beyond 34 cycles, your chance of a positive PCR test being a true positive shrinks to zero, as illustrated in the following graph from that study.7

    By running PCR tests at 40 to 45 amplification cycles, you end up with the false appearance of an outbreak, and this grossly flawed testing scheme is what government leaders are basing their mask mandates and lockdown orders on.
    percentage of positive viral culture

    Percentage of positive viral culture of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive nasopharyngeal samples from Covid-19 patients, according to Ct value (plain line). The dashed curve indicates the polynomial regression curve.
    Scientific Review Confirms PCR Flaws

    More recently, a December 3, 2020, systematic review8 published in the journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases assessed the findings of 29 different studies — all of which were published in 2020 — comparing evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection with the CTs used in testing. They also looked at the timing of the test, and how symptom severity relates to PCR test results. As reported by the authors:

    “The data suggest a relationship between the time from onset of symptom to the timing of the specimen test, cycle threshold (CT) and symptom severity. Twelve studies reported that CT values were significantly lower and log copies higher in specimens producing live virus culture.

    Two studies reported the odds of live virus culture reduced by approximately 33% for every one unit increase in CT. Six of eight studies reported detectable RNA for longer than 14 days but infectious potential declined after day 8 even among cases with ongoing high viral loads …”

    In other words, if you have symptoms of COVID-19, by Day 8 from the onset of symptoms, the chances of you spreading it to others starts to decline, and in the days following, you are unlikely to be infectious even if you still test positive. This is particularly true if the PCR test is using a higher than ideal CT. As noted by the authors:9

    “Complete live viruses are necessary for transmission, not the fragments identified by PCR. Prospective routine testing of reference and culture specimens and their relationship to symptoms, signs and patient co-factors should be used to define the reliability of PCR for assessing infectious potential. Those with high cycle threshold are unlikely to have infectious potential.”

    Live Virus Unlikely in Tests Using CT Above 24

    According to The New York Times,10 researchers have been “unable to grow the coronavirus out of samples from volunteers whose PCR tests had CT values above 27,” and if the virus cannot replicate, you will not get ill and are not infectious, so you cannot spread it to others.

    The Clinical Infectious Diseases review11 confirms this. Under the heading “The Relationship Between RT-PCR Results and Viral Culture of SARS-CoV-2,”12 they point out that “significantly lower” CTs were used in studies that correctly identified infectious patients.

    Five of the studies included were unable to identify any live viruses in cases where a positive PCR test had used a CT above 24. What’s more, in order to produce live virus culture, a patient whose PCR test used a CT at or above 35 had to be symptomatic.

    So, to clarify, if you have symptoms of COVID-19 and test positive using a PCR test that was run at 35 amplification cycles or higher, then you are likely to be infected and infectious.

    However, if you do not have symptoms, yet test positive using a PCR test run at 35 CTs or higher, then it is likely a false positive and you pose no risk to others as you’re unlikely to carry any live virus. In fact, provided you’re asymptomatic, you’re unlikely to be infectious even if you test positive with a test run at 24 CTs or higher.
    Timing of PCR Test Also Matters

    The Clinical Infectious Diseases review also confirmed that the timing of the test matters. According to the authors:13

    “… there appears to be a time window during which RNA detection is at its highest with low cycle threshold and higher possibility of culturing a live virus, with viral load and probability of growing live virus of SARS-CoV2 …

    We propose that further work should be done on this with the aim of constructing an algorithm for integrating the results of PCR with other variables, to increase the effectiveness of detecting infectious patients.”

    Another scientific review14,15 that looked into how the timing of the test influences results and your risk of being infectious was posted on the preprint server medRxiv September 29, 2020. Fourteen studies were included in this review.

    The data show that your chances of getting a true positive on the first day of COVID-19 symptom onset is only about 40%. Not until Day 3 from symptom onset do you have an 80% chance of getting an accurate PCR result.

    By Day 5 the accuracy shrinks considerably and by Day 8 the accuracy is nil. Now, these are symptomatic people. When you’re asymptomatic, your odds of a positive PCR test being accurate is virtually nonexistent.

    The graph below, from one of the studies16 included in the review (Bullard et. al.), illustrates the probability of a patient being infectious (having live virus) based on the CT used and the timing of the test. As explained by the review authors:17

    “The figure … shows how the probability of SARS-CoV-2 infectious virus is greater (the red bars) when the cycle threshold is lower (the blue line) and when symptoms to test time is shorter — beyond 8 days, no live virus was detected.”

    probability of a patient being infectious
    Florida to Require Disclosure of CT Data

    Even though health authorities know that high CTs result in high rates of false positives, they do not specify the CT used for the PCR tests they’re reporting. Fortunately, that’s about to change in Florida, which just became the first state to require all labs in the state to report the CT used for their PCR tests.18

    The Florida Health Department issued the order December 3, 2020, and labs must comply with the new mandatory reporting rule within seven days.19

    This could prove quite interesting, especially if the state health department decides to invalidate positive results obtained from tests run above a certain amplification threshold. Time will tell exactly how this reporting requirement might influence pandemic response measures such as mask mandates and lockdowns.
    Portugal Rules Quarantine Based on PCR Results Is Unlawful

    In related news, an appeals court in Portugal recently ruled20,21 that the PCR test is “not a reliable test for SARS-CoV-2” and that “a single positive PCR test cannot be used as an effective diagnosis of infection.” Therefore, “any enforced quarantine based on the results is unlawful.”22

    The court also noted that forcing healthy people to self-isolate could be a violation of their fundamental right to liberty. The case was brought by four German tourists who had been forced to self-quarantine after one of them tested positive.

    Several scientific studies were brought forth as evidence in this case, including a September 28, 2020, study23 in Clinical Infectious Diseases, which found that when you run a PCR test at a CT of 35 or higher, the accuracy drops to 3%, resulting in a 97% false positive rate. The court ruled that, based on the science presented, any PCR test using a CT over 25 is unreliable.
    Fatal Errors Found in Paper on Which PCR Testing Is Based

    The Portuguese appeals court is not alone in its critique of the PCR test being used as the sole criteria for quarantine. November 30, 2020, the scientific paper24 describing the work flow of how to use the PCR test to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection — which was quickly accepted as the standard by the WHO and applied across the world — was challenged25 by 22 international scientists who demand that the paper be retracted due to “fatal errors.”26

    The paper in question was written by Christian Drosten, Ph.D., a German virologist, and Victor Corman, who heads a German working group on virus diagnostics and clinical virology. According to Reiner Fuellmich,27 founding member of the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee (Außerparlamentarischer Corona Untersuchungsausschuss,28 or ACU),29,30 Drosten is a key culprit in the COVID-19 pandemic hoax.

    One of the key “fatal errors” in the Corman-Drosten paper is that they wrote it — and developed the PCR test — before there was any viral isolate available. All they used was the genetic sequence published online by Chinese scientists in January 2020.

    Interestingly, the paper was published a mere 24 hours after it was submitted, which suggests it wasn’t even peer-reviewed before being embraced by the whole world. Undercover DC interviewed Kevin Corbett, Ph.D., one of the 22 scientists who are now demanding the paper’s retraction, who stated:31

    “Every scientific rationale for the development of that test has been totally destroyed by this paper. It’s like Hiroshima/Nagasaki to the COVID test.

    When Drosten developed the test, China hadn’t given them a viral isolate. They developed the test from a sequence in a gene bank. Do you see? China gave them a genetic sequence with no corresponding viral isolate. They had a code, but no body for the code. No viral morphology.

    In the fish market, it’s like giving you a few bones and saying ‘that’s your fish.’ It could be any fish ... Listen, the Corman-Drosten paper, there’s nothing from a patient in it. It’s all from gene banks. And the bits of the virus sequence that weren’t there they made up.

    They synthetically created them to fill in the blanks. That’s what genetics is; it’s a code. So, its ABBBCCDDD and you’re missing some, what you think is EEE, so you put it in ... This is basically a computer virus.

    There are 10 fatal errors in this Drosten test paper ... But here is the bottom line: There was no viral isolate to validate what they were doing. The PCR products of the amplification didn’t correspond to any viral isolate at that time. I call it ‘donut ring science.’ There is nothing at the center of it. It’s all about code, genetics, nothing to do with reality …

    There have since been papers saying they’ve produced viral isolates. But there are no controls for them. The CDC produced a paper in July … where they said: ‘Here’s the viral isolate.’ Do you know what they did? They swabbed one person. One person, who’d been to China and had cold symptoms. One person. And they assumed he had [COVID-19] to begin with. So, it’s all full of holes, the whole thing.”

    No Viable Virus Found in Positive Cases

    The critique against PCR testing is further strengthened by a November 20, 2020, study32 in Nature Communications, which found no viable virus in PCR-positive cases. The study evaluated data from 9,865,404 residents of Wuhan, China, who had undergone PCR testing between May 14 and June 1, 2020.

    A total of 300 tested positive but had no symptoms. Of the 34,424 people with a history of COVID-19, 107 tested positive a second time. Yet when they did virus cultures on these 407 individuals who had tested positive (either for the first or second time), no live virus was found.
    Expose the Fraud, End the Misery

    A number of experts have now come forward, calling out the COVID-19 pandemic as a cruel hoax perpetuated by fatally flawed testing. Aside from this testing data, there’s no evidence of a lethal pandemic at all. While there is such a thing as COVID-19, and people have and do die from it, there are no excess deaths due to it.33,34,35

    In other words, the total mortality for 2020 is normal. The pandemic has not killed more people than would die in any given year — from something, anything — anyway. So, unless we think we should shut down the world and stop living because people die from heart disease, diabetes, cancer, the flu or anything else, then there’s no reason to shut down the world because some people happen to die from COVID-19.

    The good news is the hoax is starting to be exposed, and will continue to be exposed as more cases are brought before the courts of the world. Fuellmich and his ACU legal team are leading that charge. As for what you can do in the meantime, consider:

    • Turning off mainstream media news and turning to independent experts — Do the research. Read through the science.

    • Continue to counter the censorship by asking questions — The more questions are asked, the more answers will come to light. Arm yourself with mortality statistics and the facts on PCR testing, so you can explain how and why this pandemic simply isn’t a pandemic anymore.

    • If you are a medical professional, especially if you’re a member of a professional society, write an open letter to your government, urging them to speak to and heed recommendations from independent experts.

    • Sign The Great Barrington Declaration,36 which calls for an end to lockdowns.

    • Join a group so that you can have support. Examples of groups formed to fight against government overreach include:

    ◦ Us for Them, a group campaigning for reopening schools and protecting children’s rights in the U.K.

    ◦ The COVID Recovery Group (CRG), founded by 50 conservative British MPs to fight lockdown restrictions37

    ◦ The Freedom to Breathe Agency, a U.S. team of attorneys, doctors, business owners and parents who are fighting to protect freedom and liberty
    Last edited by Reinhard; 31st December 2020 at 11:13.
    The very moment the caterpillar thought the world would end, it turned into a butterfly.
    Laotse

  34. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Reinhard For This Post:

    avid (18th December 2020), greybeard (18th December 2020), onawah (26th December 2020), Philippe (18th December 2020), pueblo (18th December 2020)

  35. Link to Post #58
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    The whole lockdown and fearmongering is built on a false premise ie that the tests are valid,
    Months ago several members got their knuckles rapped for pointing this out.
    The tests are not fit for purpose.
    AND the health and economy of this world is under great threat due to people believing that this virus is a pandemic and will kill them.
    The only truth is that there is a seasonal virus, call it a flu, which conforms to the normal pattern -- it comes it goes -- some wlil die --the great majority will survive.
    This years mortality very similar to the average experienced every year.

    Chris
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  36. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    avid (18th December 2020), onawah (26th December 2020), Philippe (18th December 2020), Reinhard (18th December 2020)

  37. Link to Post #59
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,208
    Thanks
    47,680
    Thanked 116,091 times in 20,639 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    Why does the WHO Now Admit that the PCR COVID Tests are Not Accurate? So They Can Claim the Vaccine is Working?
    December 18, 2020
    https://vaccineimpact.com/2020/why-d...ne-is-working/

    WHO (finally) admits PCR tests create false positives
    Warnings concerning high CT value of tests are months too late…so why are they appearing now? The potential explanation is shockingly cynical.

    by Kit Knightly
    OffGuardian.org

    "The World Health Organization released a guidance memo on December 14th, warning that high cycle thresholds on PCR tests will result in false positives.

    While this information is accurate, it has also been available for months, so we must ask: why are they reporting it now? Is it to make it appear the vaccine works?

    The “gold standard” Sars-Cov-2 tests are based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR). PCR works by taking nucleotides – tiny fragments of DNA or RNA – and replicating them until they become something large enough to identify.

    The replication is done in cycles, with each cycle doubling the amount of genetic material.

    The number of cycles it takes to produce something identifiable is known as the “cycle threshold” or “CT value”.

    The higher the CT value, the less likely you are to be detecting anything significant.

    This new WHO memo states that using a high CT value to test for the presence of Sars-Cov-2 will result in false-positive results.

    To quote their own words [our emphasis]:

    Users of RT-PCR reagents should read the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is necessary to account for any background noise which may lead to a specimen with a high cycle threshold (Ct) value result being interpreted as a positive result.

    They go on to explain [again, our emphasis]:

    The design principle of RT-PCR means that for patients with high levels of circulating virus (viral load), relatively few cycles will be needed to detect virus and so the Ct value will be low.

    Conversely, when specimens return a high Ct value, it means that many cycles were required to detect virus. In some circumstances, the distinction between background noise and actual presence of the target virus is difficult to ascertain.

    Of course, none of this is news to anyone who has been paying attention. That PCR tests were easily manipulated and potentially highly inaccurate has been one of the oft-repeated battle cries of those of us opposing the “pandemic” narrative, and the policies it’s being used to sell.

    Many articles have been written about it, by many experts in the field, medical journalists and other researchers. It’s been commonly available knowledge, for months now, that any test using a CT value over 35 is potentially meaningless.

    Dr Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize for inventing the PCR process, was clear that it wasn’t meant as a diagnostic tool, saying:

    with PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody.

    And, commenting on cycle thresholds, once said:

    If you have to go more than 40 cycles to amplify a single-copy gene, there is something seriously wrong with your PCR.

    The MIQE guidelines for PCR use state:

    Cq values higher than 40 are suspect because of the implied low efficiency and generally should not be reported,

    This has all been public knowledge since the beginning of the lockdown. The Australian government’s own website admitted the tests were flawed, and a court in Portugal ruled they were not fit for purpose.

    Even Dr Anthony Fauci has publicly admitted that a cycle threshold over 35 is going to be detecting “dead nucleotides”, not a living virus.

    Despite all this, it is known that many labs around the world have been using PCR tests with CT values over 35, even into the low 40s.

    So why has the WHO finally decided to say this is wrong? What reason could they have for finally choosing to recognise this simple reality?

    The answer to that is potentially shockingly cynical: We have a vaccine now. We don’t need false positives anymore.

    Notionally, the system has produced its miracle cure. So, after everyone has been vaccinated, all the PCR tests being done will be done “under the new WHO guidelines”, and running only 25-30 cycles instead of 35+.

    Lo and behold, the number of “positive cases” will plummet, and we’ll have confirmation that our miracle vaccine works.

    After months of flooding the data pool with false positives, miscounting deaths “by accident”, adding “Covid19 related death” to every other death certificate…they can stop. The create-a-pandemic machine can be turned down to zero again.

    …as long as we all do as we’re told. Any signs of dissent – masses of people refusing the vaccine, for example – and the CT value can start to climb again, and they bring back their magical disease.

    Read the full article at OffGuardian.org.

    Comments by Brian Shilhavy, Editor, Health Impact News:
    Think of the moral and legal implications over admitting at this late stage that the COVID test used to lock down the world has been inaccurate all along.

    How many people died due to fear over the hysteria caused by using these false tests? How many lives have been ruined from loss of income, jobs, and family members?

    If this had been treated as a seasonal flu strain like every other year, where would we be today?

    These are crimes against humanity, and the top bureaucrat “doctors” who controlled public policy on COVID are guilty of mass murder.

    And Kit is probably correct in stating that they are only doing this now to start promoting the COVID vaccines, because 30-year veteran journalist Jon Rapopport, as usual, was the first one to predict this over a month ago. See:

    How they’ll fake the success of the COVID vaccine
    PCR Test Inventor Kary Mullis Exposes Dr. Fauci and his Criminal Cabal

    (Video here, which I will ask the MODS to embed.)
    Dr. Kary Mullis died in 2019, just weeks before the COVID Plandemic was launched."


    Source: https://www.bitchute.com/video/G7KZng01KZcl/
    Last edited by Tintin; 26th December 2020 at 11:37.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  38. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Reinhard (26th December 2020), Tintin (26th December 2020)

  39. Link to Post #60
    Germany Avalon Member Reinhard's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th February 2011
    Location
    Munich
    Age
    74
    Posts
    142
    Thanks
    65,407
    Thanked 706 times in 127 posts

    Default Re: How reliable are the COVID-19 tests?

    Onawah, EXACTLY!!..........."they" knew it all along........built their criminal plan on it, and are starting phase 2, using CT as a perfect manipulation tool to reach the (final?) goal: total controll via worldwide vaccination. A cynical plan and crime against humanity! I hope, Fuellmich et al will be successful --- soon, before it's too late for thousands/millions of humans.
    Reinhard
    The very moment the caterpillar thought the world would end, it turned into a butterfly.
    Laotse

  40. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Reinhard For This Post:

    onawah (26th December 2020), Patient (26th December 2020)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 3 5 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts