The whole scam just fell apart: COVID test, overwhelming number of false positives
Jon Rappoport
Townhall.com, August 29: “According to The New York Times, potentially 90 percent of those who have tested positive for COVID-19 have such insignificant amounts of the virus present in their bodies that such individuals do not need to isolate nor are they candidates for contact tracing. Leading public health experts are now concerned that overtesting is responsible for misdiagnosing a huge number of people with harmless amounts of the virus in their systems.”
“’Most of these people are not likely to be contagious…’ warns The Times.”
Yes, that’s what the NY Times is confessing (8/29): “Some of the nation’s leading public health experts are raising a new concern in the endless debate over coronavirus testing in the United States: The standard tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus. Most of these people are not likely to be contagious…”
“In three sets of testing data…compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.”
Let me break this down for you, because it’s a lot worse than the Times admits. The rabbit hole goes much deeper—and I’ve been reporting on the deeper facts for months.
The issue appears to be the ballooning sensitivity of the PCR test. It’s so sensitive that it picks up inconsequential tiny, tiny amounts of virus that couldn’t harm a flea—and it calls these amounts “positive.”
Therefore, millions of people are labeled “positive/infected” who carry so little virus that no harm would come to them or anyone they come in contact with.
That would be bad enough. But the truth is, the PCR test is not able to produce ANY reliable number that reflects how much virus a person is carrying. A lot, a little, it doesn’t matter.
The test has never been validated, in a large-scale study, for the ability to quantify the amount of virus a person is carrying. I’ve proposed how that study should be done IN THE REAL WORLD, NOT IN THE LAB.
You take 1000 people and remove tissue samples from them. A lab puts these samples through its PCR and announces which virus it found in each case and how much virus it found in each case.
It says: “All right, in patients 23, 46, 76, 89, 265 we found a high amount of virus.”
That should mean these particular patients are visibly sick. They will have obvious clinical symptoms. Why? Because actual illness requires millions of millions of a virus replicating in the body.
So now we unblind these particular patients with high amounts of virus, according to the PCR. Are they, in fact, sick? Or are they running marathons and swimming five miles a day? Let’s see. For real.
THIS VALIDATION OF THE PCR HAS NEVER BEEN DONE.
Therefore, the claim that the PCR can determine how much virus is in a human is completely and utterly unproven. Period.
Therefore, ALL the PCR tests being done on people all over the world reflect NOTHING about illness, infection, contagion, or transmission.
The scam is wall to wall.
But there’s more.
The PCR isn’t even testing for a particular virus in the first place. It’s using a piece of RNA assumed to be part of a virus. The assumption is unproven.
And finally, as I’ve been writing and demonstrating for months, there is no evidence that researchers used proper procedure to discover “a new coronavirus that is causing a pandemic.”
Therefore, the PCR test, as worthless as it already is, aims to show the presence of a germ that has never been shown to exist.
But let’s lock down the planet, destroy economies and untold numbers of lives in the process.
SOURCES:
townhall.com/tipsheet/bronsonstocking/2020/08/29/it-looks-like-a-lot-of-those-positive-covid-tests-should-have-been-negative-n2575305
nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html
*********
Pictorial content and emphasis added by (TLB) editors
(TLB) published this original article from the blog of Jon Rappoport with our appreciation for his contribution to raise health and freedom awareness.
Jon Rappoport is the author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Leave a Reply