Another failure of the COVID diagnostic test
July 29, 2020
(To join our email list, click here.)
In previous articles, I’ve detailed several key reasons why the PCR test is worthless and deceptive. (PCR article archive here).
Here I discuss yet another reason: the uniformity of the test has
never been properly validated. Different labs come up with different
results.
Let’s start here—the reference is the NY Times, January 22, 2007, “Faith in Quick Tests Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t.”
“Dr. Brooke Herndon, an internist at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical
Center, could not stop coughing…By late April, other health care workers
at the hospital were coughing…”
“For months, nearly everyone involved thought the medical center had
had a huge whooping cough outbreak, with extensive ramifications. Nearly
1,000 health care workers at the hospital in Lebanon, N.H., were given a
preliminary test and furloughed from work until their results were in;
142 people, including Dr. Herndon, were told they appeared to have the
disease; and thousands were given antibiotics and a vaccine for
protection. Hospital beds were taken out of commission, including some
in intensive care.”
“Then, about eight months later, health care workers were dumbfounded
to receive an e-mail message from the hospital administration informing
them that the whole thing was a false alarm.”
“Now, as they look back on the episode, epidemiologists and
infectious disease specialists say the problem was that they placed too
much faith in a quick and highly sensitive molecular test [PCR] that led
them astray.”
“There are no national data on pseudo-epidemics caused by an
overreliance on such molecular tests, said Dr. Trish M. Perl, an
epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins and past president of the Society of
Health Care Epidemiologists of America. But, she said, pseudo-epidemics
happen all the time. The Dartmouth case may have been one the largest,
but it was by no means an exception, she said.”
“Many of the new molecular [PCR] tests are quick but technically
demanding, and each laboratory may do them in its own way. These tests,
called ‘home brews,’ are not commercially available, and there are no
good estimates of their error rates. But their very sensitivity makes
false positives likely, and when hundreds or thousands of people are
tested, as occurred at Dartmouth, false positives can make it seem like
there is an epidemic.”
“’You’re in a little bit of no man’s land,’ with the new molecular
[PCR] tests, said Dr. Mark Perkins, an infectious disease specialist and
chief scientific officer at the Foundation for Innovative New
Diagnostics, a nonprofit foundation supported by the Bill and Melinda
Gates Foundation. ‘All bets are off on exact performance’.”
“With pertussis, she [Dr. Kretsinger, CDC] said, ‘there are probably
100 different P.C.R. protocols and methods being used throughout the
country,’ and it is unclear how often any of them are accurate. ‘We have
had a number of outbreaks where we believe that despite the presence of
P.C.R.-positive results, the disease was not pertussis,’ Dr. Kretsinger
added.”
“Dr. Cathy A. Petti, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Utah, said the story had one clear lesson.”
“’The big message is that every lab is vulnerable to having false
positives,’ Dr. Petti said. ‘No single test result is absolute and that
is even more important with a test result based on P.C.R’.”
—Sobering, to say the least. Of course, some people will claim that
since the date of the Times’ article (2007), vast improvements have been
made in the PCR test.
Really? The truth is, something much worse is lurking in the weeds.
It has been lurking ever since the PCR was approved for use in
diagnostics:
No large study validating the uniformity of PCR results, from lab to lab, has ever been done.
You would think at least a dozen very large studies had checked for
uniform results, before unleashing the PCR on the public; but no, this
was not the case. It is still not the case.
Here is what should have been done decades ago:
Take a thousand volunteers. Remove tissue samples from each person.
Send those samples to 30 different labs. Have the labs run PCR and
announce their findings for each volunteer.
“We found the following virus in sample 1…” Something simple like that.
Now compare the findings, in each of the 1000 cases, from all 30
labs. Are the findings the same? Are the outcomes uniform all the way
across the board?
My money would be against it. Strongly against.
But this is not the end of the process. SEVERAL of these large-scale
studies should be done. In EACH study, there are 1000 volunteers and
30 labs.
Why? Because, as you can readily see, the whole story about a
current pandemic is riding on those tests. The story, the containment
measures, the lockdowns, the economic devastation, the human
destruction—it’s all built on the presumption that the PCR is a valid
test.
It’s unthinkable that these validation studies of the PCR weren’t
done decades ago. But they weren’t. And there is only one reason why:
to avoid the truth. The results of the PCR aren’t uniform. They vary
from lab to lab.
One lab says positive for virus B. Another lab says negative for virus B. Both labs are looking at the same sample.
No? Couldn’t be? Then prove it with the several large-scale studies I’m proposing.
I’ll give you a rough fictional analogy for the current testing situation—
In an old-growth forest of immense trees, a government agency tests
white spots found on some trunks. The verdict? A highly destructive
and novel fungus, for which there is no remedy. Without immediate and
drastic action, the fungus will spread to the whole forest and destroy
all the trees.
So a government contract is signed with a logging company, and workers move in and start cutting down many trees.
Meanwhile, another lab tests those white spots and reports they’re
harmless bird droppings. Yet another lab claims they’re a mild
traditional fungus of no great concern.
The reports of these two labs are suppressed and censored. The labs are put on a quiet blacklist, and their business dries up.
The tree cutting continues.
An analyst at the US Forestry Service sends a memo to his boss. It
details the fact that the test which found deadly fungus is unreliable.
Different labs doing the test come up with different and conflicting
results.
Worse yet, that test was never properly validated as a uniform
process before being approved for use. In other words, no one did a
large study in which multiple labs used the test to determine the
composition of spots found on trees. No one made sure that all labs
came to the same conclusions using the test.
The Forestry analyst writes: “The test has inherent flaws. Different
labs examining the same sample will always come up with different
results. This has disastrous consequences in the real world. You can
see that now; we are cutting down half a forest to prevent the spread of
a fungus which has been noticed for centuries, and never caused serious
harm…”
The analyst is fired from his job and firmly reminded that he signed a
non-disclosure agreement, and he better keep his mouth shut.
The tree-cutting goes on. A developer buys up the cleared land at a very low price…
In essence, the pipeline of information from actually reliable
sources, to the government, and then to the public, is narrowed, and
guarded against unwelcome intrusions of TRUTH.
In the case of the PCR test, that’s what is happening.
SOURCE:
nytimes.com/2007/01/22/health/22whoop.html
Source: nomorefakenews.com
Showing posts with label Failures. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Failures. Show all posts
Thursday, July 30, 2020
Blogger's note:
subterrnews.blogspot.com does not send cookies, or collect any information on
those using the blog. However, the blogspot is on google, and google may
collect information, and send cookies. Many of the links that we
connect to do not send out cookies or collect information, but some do.
You are keying in to this blog, and you have agreed to this.
The views expressed in the articles
do not necessarily represent the opinions of this blog. They are the views, and opinions of the
author(s) of the article.
Saturday, October 19, 2019
Big Pharma’s Vaccine Propaganda Covers Up Vaccine Failures
October 15, 2019
Technocracy News & Trends for Tuesday, October 15, 2019
Big Pharma, which is full of Technocrat groupthink, demands
universally mandated vaccinations that either don’t work or are harmful
to the human population. Anti-Vaxxers are demonized, harassed and
censored for daring to use common sense in defense against the
propaganda. Stories covered today
Technocracy, Luddism And The Environmental CrisisMultiple Studies Show MMR And Pertussis Vaccine Failure
Behavioral Science Used To Get Citizens To Dump Their Cars
Audio
Blogger's note:
subterrnews.blogspot.com does not send cookies, or collect any information on
those using the blog. However, the blogspot is on google, and google may
collect information, and send cookies. Many of the links that we
connect to do not send out cookies or collect information, but some do.
Your keying in to this blog you have agreed to this.
The views expressed in the articles
do not necessarily represent the opinions of this blog. They are the views, and opinions of the
author(s) of the article.
Source: technocracy.news
Labels: Big Pharma, Failures, PROPAGANDA, Vaccine
Friday, April 21, 2017
Total Chaos: Cyber Attack Fears
As MULTIPLE CITIES HIT With Simultaneous Power Grid Failures: Shockwave Of Delays In San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York
The U.S. power grid appears to have been hit with multiple power outages affecting San Francisco, New York and Los Angeles.
Officials report that business, traffic and day-to-day life has come to a standstill in San Francisco, reportedly the worst hit of the three major cities currently experiencing outages.
Power companies in all three regions have yet to elaborate on the cause, though a fire at a substation was the original reason given by San Francisco officials.
The cause of the outage has not yet been made clear, though given the current geo-political climate it is not out of the question to suggest a cyber attack could be to blame. It has also been suggested that the current outages could be the result of a secretive nuclear/EMP drill by the federal government.
As we have previously reported, the entire national power grid has been mapped by adversaries of the United States and it is believed that sleep trojans or malware may exist within the computer systems that maintain the grid.
In a 2016 report it was noted that our entire way of life has been left vulnerable to saboteurs who could cause cascading blackouts across the United States for days or weeks at a time:
Whether the current outages are the result of a targeted infrastructure cyber attack or simply a coincidence, most Americans think the impossible can’t happen, as The Prepper’s Blueprint author Tess Pennington highlights, a grid-down scenario won’t just be a minor inconvenience if it goes on for more than a day or two:
It is for this reason that we have long encouraged Americans to prepare for this potentially devastating scenario by considering emergency food reserves, clean water reserves and even home defense strategies in the event of a widespread outage.
The majority of Americans have about 3 days worth of food in their pantry.
Imagine for a moment what Day 4 might look like in any major city that goes dark.
This exclusive clip from American Blackout shows what an extended outage might look like:
Prepare for the worst, because this is one scenario you do not want to face.
Copyright Information: Copyright SHTFplan and Mac Slavo. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in digital form with full attribution to the author and a link to www.shtfplan.com. Please contact us for permission to reproduce this content in other media formats.
|
Labels: Cyber Attacks, Failures, grid, LA, New York, San Francisco
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)