I don't know about the US. But in Germany the ideal situation was never present. The labs did run double the amount of cycles that could give you a real idea if the person has more then a scrap of whatever the test looks for in his mouth or nostril. It cannot say if it is viable or dead. It can just say it's present. But with a too high number of cycles, we are talking trace amount. I know people with two positive tests and two negative ones on the same day. I don't know if the human genome match could potentially make false positives. But overtesting and a too high number of cycles sure can. Up to well over 90% false positives. Thats why monitoring healthy school children or otherwise symptomless people with PCR isn't a meaningful thing to do. My poor grandniece is becoming an IC nurse. The kid went six times into PCR quarantine, plus two times Corona infection, which not always led to a positive test right when it became interesting in terms of potential transmission. If this even was the goal.
To create numbers and fear, the test was fabulous. And fear is, what Dr. Drosten knows and likes best, he has done so with swine flu before. So yes I believe he made the test to create cases not to detect actual illness, but I cannot say, if the human genome matches can add to that.
There is, I think, (as suggested also by Pete Ross) an explanation why 2 primers were not found in the SARS2 sequence but were in the human. The explanation is that 2 primers for human genome were included as a standard procedure for quantity comparisons. The CDC protocol for the PCR test for covid expressly mentions this: "An additional primer/probe set to detect the human RNase P gene (RP) in control samples and clinical specimens is also included in the panel."
The benefit of this inclusion is explained by a lab technician (Dr. McKernan) here, who says that without this signal you can't make any sense of the rest of the info:
More than 12 cycles and you veer dramatcally towards false positive. Default in practise is 28 to 35, therefore, in scientific terms, the reading is 'bullshit'. But, not to worry, Bill is making a bullshit vaccine. Oh, but then this is not news, eh?
The two primers that match to human genome but not to "SARS-CoV-2" genome might be for the purpose of comprising an internal quality control for the RT-PCR process.
.
"The RNase P internal control has been designed to control for presence of human cellular material in the sample and proper assay execution including sample inhibition, amplification, and assay reagent function. If RNase P is not detected, the Cue COVID-19 Test will return an "Invalid" result.
Author: Elena Garcia
Created Date: 4/1/2021 9:37:54 PM
COVID-19 Cue™ COVID-19 Test Instructions For Use For Professio…
We shouldn't forget that the CDC didn't even require a PCR test or any other assay for a COVID diagnosis.
Other than that, false positives become a proportionally bigger issue when true positives are low.
When prevalence is zero, tests with less than 100% specificity will create the illusion of whatever is being tested for still being prevalent.
However the low specificity of the tests can only lead to a constant (relative to the number of tests being conducated) background noise of false positives, hence do not explain COVID waves, so I think there is way too much fuzz around this topic.
Hey Ben. Glad you're helping expose the virus fraud. I just found your stuff recently and now paying for your Substack. I pay for Viroliegy as well. We're all in this together. I'd be honored if you read my book. It covers lots of information but is full of facts studies, but I think is a great introduction for someone just exposed to the no virus view. On Amazon, Vaccines, Viruses, and Bacteria: Not What You've Been Told.
Kary Mullis would have had a lot to say on this topic. RIP Kary, but I can hear him kick'n down the door of Heaven over what's happened in the past 3years.
Where is Drosten's thesis that would prove he is a PHD? Dr. Kary Mullis the inventor of the RT PCR test said that his RT PCR test should NEVER be used as a diagnostic tool! I also saw a video of Dr. Kary Mullis saying the same thing and also not thinking too much of Fauci! He was not impressed with him! I read this and watched video at the beginning of
this whole planned pandemic! Dr. Reiner Fullmich efforts to bring this all to trial !
Here in the UK I am able to like or retweet the article by Likkyleaks, and despite the warning on the Substack link that "it's detected as spam" there's an option to continue ito read the article if you wish to do so. So the ban isn't effective?
Christian Drosten' PCR test has been denounced multiple times by many scientists in that field as early as 2021. It's a travesty that governments are willfully blind to it's unscientific results.
This is pure speculation, based on nothing, but I will put this out there for the sake of brainstorming. I wonder if they ever went around spraying RNA into the air. (Or DNA? The RT-PCR will detect DNA too, right?) So they could spray this genetic material around at some event, it would get into people's noses who would would then test positive with PCR, and all of a sudden we have a "super-spreader" event. It wouldn't be good to spread around spike RNA because that would be too risky for getting caught, so they could spread some random human-like genetic material.
"As shown above, not all PCR primers suggested by Drosten match the SARS-Cov-2 genome. It remains unclear why."
One of my hypothesis for the whole PCR test scam raised the question of 'what were they actually testing for?'. The first "obvious" answer was a common coronavirus, but that seemed *too* obvious. Then I had a thought - the Midazolam murders indicates the globalists have a eugenics bent (killing off the elderly, the weak, etc), so surely the PCR tests follow the same line of reasoning?
My suspicion - which I had trouble proving - was the PCR tests for specific genetic groups of humans (which ones, is not possible to say). So essentially it's like a genetic purity test kit. Those who test "positive" (read: 'unpure') get put onto COVID-19 murder pathways (per the ICU giving COVID-19 patients higher dosages of drugs for no specified reasons). Your finding of the three human genomes verifies this suspicion.
The question now becomes, which group(s) are they targeting, and who do they exclude?
Working out who they exclude would give us a smoking gun as to the culprit's identity.
I don't know about the US. But in Germany the ideal situation was never present. The labs did run double the amount of cycles that could give you a real idea if the person has more then a scrap of whatever the test looks for in his mouth or nostril. It cannot say if it is viable or dead. It can just say it's present. But with a too high number of cycles, we are talking trace amount. I know people with two positive tests and two negative ones on the same day. I don't know if the human genome match could potentially make false positives. But overtesting and a too high number of cycles sure can. Up to well over 90% false positives. Thats why monitoring healthy school children or otherwise symptomless people with PCR isn't a meaningful thing to do. My poor grandniece is becoming an IC nurse. The kid went six times into PCR quarantine, plus two times Corona infection, which not always led to a positive test right when it became interesting in terms of potential transmission. If this even was the goal.
To create numbers and fear, the test was fabulous. And fear is, what Dr. Drosten knows and likes best, he has done so with swine flu before. So yes I believe he made the test to create cases not to detect actual illness, but I cannot say, if the human genome matches can add to that.
Well of course they needed a test that would give positives to something that's never existed. Otherwise there would have been no plandemic.
This could explain the apparent high false positive rate (asymptomatic positive) I saw in our testing program ... definitely needs more examination.
There is, I think, (as suggested also by Pete Ross) an explanation why 2 primers were not found in the SARS2 sequence but were in the human. The explanation is that 2 primers for human genome were included as a standard procedure for quantity comparisons. The CDC protocol for the PCR test for covid expressly mentions this: "An additional primer/probe set to detect the human RNase P gene (RP) in control samples and clinical specimens is also included in the panel."
The benefit of this inclusion is explained by a lab technician (Dr. McKernan) here, who says that without this signal you can't make any sense of the rest of the info:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=feWzKpaFuDA
The protocol for the USA and 6 other countries may be found here:
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/whoinhouseassays.pdf?sfvrsn=de3a76aa_2
More than 12 cycles and you veer dramatcally towards false positive. Default in practise is 28 to 35, therefore, in scientific terms, the reading is 'bullshit'. But, not to worry, Bill is making a bullshit vaccine. Oh, but then this is not news, eh?
Phony testing was the central plank of the whole COVID scam.
The two primers that match to human genome but not to "SARS-CoV-2" genome might be for the purpose of comprising an internal quality control for the RT-PCR process.
.
"The RNase P internal control has been designed to control for presence of human cellular material in the sample and proper assay execution including sample inhibition, amplification, and assay reagent function. If RNase P is not detected, the Cue COVID-19 Test will return an "Invalid" result.
Author: Elena Garcia
Created Date: 4/1/2021 9:37:54 PM
COVID-19 Cue™ COVID-19 Test Instructions For Use For Professio…
www.fda.gov/media/138826/download "
We shouldn't forget that the CDC didn't even require a PCR test or any other assay for a COVID diagnosis.
Other than that, false positives become a proportionally bigger issue when true positives are low.
When prevalence is zero, tests with less than 100% specificity will create the illusion of whatever is being tested for still being prevalent.
However the low specificity of the tests can only lead to a constant (relative to the number of tests being conducated) background noise of false positives, hence do not explain COVID waves, so I think there is way too much fuzz around this topic.
Very cool stack. Subscribed!
Hey Ben. Glad you're helping expose the virus fraud. I just found your stuff recently and now paying for your Substack. I pay for Viroliegy as well. We're all in this together. I'd be honored if you read my book. It covers lots of information but is full of facts studies, but I think is a great introduction for someone just exposed to the no virus view. On Amazon, Vaccines, Viruses, and Bacteria: Not What You've Been Told.
https://www.amazon.com/Vaccines-Viruses-Bacteria-What-Youve-ebook/dp/B0C1HJZX1Q/ref=sr_1_1?crid=12SZJ6Q3KE3KZ&keywords=vaccines+viruses+and+bacteria&qid=1681131408&sprefix=vaccines+viruses+and+bacteria%2Caps%2C102&sr=8-1
Kary Mullis would have had a lot to say on this topic. RIP Kary, but I can hear him kick'n down the door of Heaven over what's happened in the past 3years.
Where is Drosten's thesis that would prove he is a PHD? Dr. Kary Mullis the inventor of the RT PCR test said that his RT PCR test should NEVER be used as a diagnostic tool! I also saw a video of Dr. Kary Mullis saying the same thing and also not thinking too much of Fauci! He was not impressed with him! I read this and watched video at the beginning of
this whole planned pandemic! Dr. Reiner Fullmich efforts to bring this all to trial !
Here in the UK I am able to like or retweet the article by Likkyleaks, and despite the warning on the Substack link that "it's detected as spam" there's an option to continue ito read the article if you wish to do so. So the ban isn't effective?
Christian Drosten' PCR test has been denounced multiple times by many scientists in that field as early as 2021. It's a travesty that governments are willfully blind to it's unscientific results.
This is pure speculation, based on nothing, but I will put this out there for the sake of brainstorming. I wonder if they ever went around spraying RNA into the air. (Or DNA? The RT-PCR will detect DNA too, right?) So they could spray this genetic material around at some event, it would get into people's noses who would would then test positive with PCR, and all of a sudden we have a "super-spreader" event. It wouldn't be good to spread around spike RNA because that would be too risky for getting caught, so they could spread some random human-like genetic material.
"As shown above, not all PCR primers suggested by Drosten match the SARS-Cov-2 genome. It remains unclear why."
One of my hypothesis for the whole PCR test scam raised the question of 'what were they actually testing for?'. The first "obvious" answer was a common coronavirus, but that seemed *too* obvious. Then I had a thought - the Midazolam murders indicates the globalists have a eugenics bent (killing off the elderly, the weak, etc), so surely the PCR tests follow the same line of reasoning?
My suspicion - which I had trouble proving - was the PCR tests for specific genetic groups of humans (which ones, is not possible to say). So essentially it's like a genetic purity test kit. Those who test "positive" (read: 'unpure') get put onto COVID-19 murder pathways (per the ICU giving COVID-19 patients higher dosages of drugs for no specified reasons). Your finding of the three human genomes verifies this suspicion.
The question now becomes, which group(s) are they targeting, and who do they exclude?
Working out who they exclude would give us a smoking gun as to the culprit's identity.
https://open.substack.com/pub/manuherold/p/-the-game-of-219-virus-species-that?r=eymvs&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
https://open.substack.com/pub/manuherold/p/-precision-one-has-to-rely-on-rules?r=eymvs&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
https://open.substack.com/pub/manuherold/p/-leave-no-stone-unturned-if-you-care?r=eymvs&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
https://open.substack.com/pub/manuherold/p/you-wont-believe-what-covid-19-pcr?r=eymvs&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
https://open.substack.com/pub/manuherold/p/tests-am-i-right?r=eymvs&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
“several mask related symptoms may have been misinterpreted as long COVID-19 symptoms.”
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1125150/full?fbclid=IwAR0gmYU2ErwiHMhNPlgLWtQQSv6atf5q7g89trQLEEqY3cE7ta9E94yx7oQ&mibextid=Zxz2cZ