PCR tests
PCR Tests
PCR tests measure debris of RNA in your system. Exosomes and what we may call viruses[1] contain RNA.
"During the early months of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, clinical specimens [of the virus] were not readily available to developers of IVDs [in vitro diagnostics] to detect SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, the FDA authorized IVDs based on available data from contrived samples generated from a range of SARS-CoV-2 material sources (for example, gene specific RNA, synthetic RNA, or whole genome viral RNA) for analytical and clinical performance evaluation.
While validation using these contrived specimens provided a measure of confidence in test performance at the beginning of the pandemic, it is not feasible to precisely compare the performance of various tests that used contrived specimens because each test validated performance using samples derived from different gene specific, synthetic, or genomic nucleic acid sources." quote from the FDA report https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-covid-19-and-medical-devices/sars-cov-2-reference-panel-comparative-data (Emphases added)
It is clear they didn't have "specimens" of "SARS-CoV-2" (COVID-19), and therefor "contrived samples" to produce PCR tests. This means they haven't been testing for COVID scientifically. The emergency approved included 59 different PCR tests that all test for different "specimens" from "contrived samples".
Yet, with the false positive tests they were able to stimulate fear and hype in the media, Coupled with false reporting protocols they made panic spread from which many people have still not returned.
"After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only." https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/2021/07-21-2021-lab-alert-Changes_CDC_RT-PCR_SARS-CoV-2_Testing_1.html
The Test
David Crowe, an expert in global infections such as SARS, Ebola, and flu, sees the coronavirus panic as an irrational panic, based on an unproven RNA test called “polymerase chain reaction” (PCR).[2]
The TEST that never was
- "The coronavirus test is based on PCR,[2] a manufacturing technique. When used as a test, it does not produce a positive/negative [actually this would be better described as "presence or absence" of the amplified gene product] result, but simply the number of cycles required to detect genetic material. The division between positive and negative is an arbitrary number of cycles chosen by the testers. If positive means infected and negative means uninfected, then there are cases of people going from infected to uninfected and back to infected again in a couple of days."
- "The world is suffering from a massive delusion based on the belief that a test for RNA is a test for a deadly new virus... but that is not proof that the RNA is from a virus. Without purification and characterization of virus particles, it cannot be accepted that an RNA test is proof that a virus is present."
Scientists have calculated the false positive rate with the PCR Test[2] for asymptomatic patients at 80%! The data is little more than a guess and the statics tell you nothing since so many people without symptoms or mild cases are never even tested with any test nor counted when estimating death rates.
|
Comments Dr. Karry Mullis attack Fauci's credibility and competence. |
|
Comments Dr. Karry Mullis, inventor of the PCR test, says they should not be used for a virus test. |
Everyone wants to believe testing settles the issue as to being infected or not. An accurate dependable test that is virus-specific was still in development in the early stages of the pandemic. Without purification and characterization of virus particles of the RNA there is no proof that a virus is present. The common PCR[2] test (polymerase chain reaction) gives many false positives and is not RNA specific. If you're sick stay home, avoid contact, treat as most flu infection or call your health provider.
Molecular assays test
The new in-house developed molecular assays test was a new and supposedly improved test but was not that useful either.
Asked how well the new tests work, Mayo Clinic internist and biostatistician Dr. Colin West said: "The most honest answer is, we don't really know."
Most of the 30 or so lab-based rapid-detection tests that detect genetic traces of the virus were validated using 30 “contrived” samples of the novel coronavirus — not a clinical trial. Even less information is available about the tests that look for the presence of antibodies in blood samples. There was little evidence that the tests work well yet decision effecting the well being, including "life, liberty, and the oursuit of happiness" of millions was being decided by politicians.
“Everybody is focused on how many tests will be out there. No one is really focusing on quality. ... We need to have the right data, not just more data.” said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.
In the Blood
The real test that was needed was a serology which tests the Blood for antigens and, more important antibodies. Such tests were developed by early March. By April results were verifying what was well known back in February, that many more people were already exposed and producing antibodies and slowing the progress of the COVID virus. The dire and miscalculated death tolls were being rolled back and herd immunity was a reachable goal long before a vaccine could be developed.
Couple this new data that was becoming more evident day by day and the success of the use HCQ with a mixture of antibiotics, zinc and other vitamins deaths from the virus was decreasing.
But Dr. Fauci continued to resist, delay, and play down what had already proven to be effective in protecting patience and actually in slowing the spread of the virus.
Exosomes |
Vaccines |
Polio Vaccine and Cancer |
Side effects |
The science |
Shutdown |
Numerous scientists |
Coronavirus |
Face masks |
Vaccinated |
Shedding |
Waning of immunity |
Just say no vaccines |
Refuse |
Stimulus |
The Way |
Health_Share |
Malachi |
Spiritual DNA and Gene Expression |
Politics of Health |
Health |
Education |
Welfare |
If you need help:
- Or want to help others:
Join The Living Network of The Companies of Ten
The Living Network |
Join Local group |
About |
Purpose |
Guidelines |
Network Removal
Contact Minister |
Fractal Network |
Audacity of Hope |
Network Links
Disclaimer
There is no offer of any "effective treatment or cure." This information is based on personal experiences, what people have learned, as well as what is available on web sites. It is not meant or offered as medical advice or diagnosis and the information provided does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the owners of PreparingYOU.com or the site itself, but is offered for educational purposes only.
Footnotes
- ↑ Your body will produce large numbers of exosomes for a variety of purposes all the time. Exosomes foreign to us also enter our bodies all the time with no ill or toxic effect but if a foreign exosome enters a cell which begins to replicate that foreign exosome and your body recognizes that foreign exosome your immune system may attack it and any cell replicating it. This immune response may cause symptoms we call illness. That means the foreign exosome would be considered "viral" because it is producing a toxic effect.
There is no reason to believe that you may also ingest exesomes from other people that will be beneficial to your body. Since exosomes can be a part of every creatures immune system you may receive into your body and begin to replicate antibodies from previously infected individual who are in the process of eliminating an infection of a "viral agent". - ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Transfection is the process of deliberately introducing naked or purified nucleic acids into eukaryotic cells.