In short RT-PCR is the tests they use for detection of SARS-CoV-2 - the novel coronavirus that is causing COVID-19.
I have been wondering for a long time how accurate the tests actually is, but couldn't find a straight answer; then have stumbled across document titled 'Impact of false-positives and false-negatives in the UK’s COVID-19 RT-PCR testing programme' which attempts to estimate accuracy of the tests. Although it does mention false positives, as expected, the government is more interested in false negatives (obviously).
Let's focus on false positives:
The document estimates current false positive rate as UNKNOWN (reminder: or lives are more or less governed by this test).
However it then gives estimate of false positives as 0.8-4.0 - median of 2.3% based on previous experience with RT-PCR.
What does that mean? Simply that as many as 100% of reported positive cases could be false positives!
Here is why, according to the document, out of 100,664 tests 98.4% were negative which leaves us with 1.6% or 1570 positives. Now if the estimated false positive rate is applied then that means between 805 and 4026 (0.8 to 4%) could be false positives which means accuracy of a positive result ranges form 0% to max 51%.
Common sense would dictate that the virus is mostly gone and increased testing generates a large number of false positives. Are we being scammed?
For reference:
Yes, I believe we are being scammed, not only by the false positives but also to get as many positive results as possible as the positive result stays on your medical record forever so whenever you die and for whatever reason they can attribute it to Covid-19 or 'Coronavirus' the government has recently conveniently switched to.
I for one would never volunteer to have the RT-PCR test and would resist most vigorously if they insisted.
Sorry to bother you guys with more numbers and stats, but this is quite interesting and backs up what we do already know using nothing else but Government own data.
Going by my original posts and if the margin of error is applied to daily CV testing data then it can be concluded that since around end of May there has been no certain new cases as reported number of positives falls below accuracy of the test so the positives could be simply false positives (or asymptomatic as they like to call it) rendering applied testing method inapriopriate to current situation.
The test is very sensitive to contamination and as recently discovered by Saint Mirren football club very error prone. They had 6 out of 7 staff test false positive at the weekly mandated test, which means the 1 positive could also be a false positive. The bbc article link below doesn’t tell us how the NHS decided the positive tests were false. That one person with a positive test is probably perfectly health, but is now on a 14 day quarantine removing themself from their job, and contact tracers could be chasing down other people.
It should also be known that the PCR test as defined on the WHO website ( check SARS section) does not confirm a live virus or a contagious person, so it’s clearly being mis-used for Covid-19. They also had cell culture testing for SARS, which confirms a live virus, but I think that requires an isolated virus for reference which they don’t have for SARS-CoV-2. I’ve added the WHO description of cell culture tests. In conclusion testing healthy people ( or cats) with PCR and declaring a positive result means as a person has Covid-19is clearly not robust enough.
1. Molecular tests (PCR) Principally, existing PCR tests are very specific but lack sensitivity. This means that negative tests cannot rule out the presence of the SARS virus in patients. Furthermore, contamination of samples in laboratories in the absence of laboratory quality control can lead to false positive results.
Positive PCR results, with the necessary quality control procedures in place. Recommendations for laboratories testing for SARS-coronavirus, are very specific and mean that there is genetic material (RNA) of the SARS-CoV in the sample. This does not mean that there is live virus present, or that it is present in a quantity large enough to infect another person.
3. Cell culture Virus in specimens (such as respiratory secretions, blood or stool) from SARS patients can also be detected by inoculating cell cultures and growing the virus. Once isolated, the virus must be identified as the SARS virus with further tests. Cell culture is a very demanding test, but currently (with the exception of animal trials) only means to show the existence of a live virus.
Positive cell culture results indicate the presence of live SARS-CoV in the sample tested.
One of the many problems with the PCR test is that the original RNA in the sample taken is replicated many times (up to 35 times) a bit like taking a photocopy of a photocopy of s pjotcopy etc. And as per @FTM888 above I too think a virus has not been isolated (any RNA/DNA has been taken from an infected person and replicated using the PCR method) so as far as I'm concerned the PCR test is being used as a weapon. Sorry to be so blunt. Keep up the good work all, it's nice to know I'm not the only one! :)
You are entirely correct. They are identifying a stretch of RNA they claim is part of the virus. They have not isolated the virus itself. This is what they do with almost all viruses. HIV etc. I suggest you watch this to understand what they did
Kary Mullis of course stated the PCR test cannot be used to prove the existence of a virus. For obvious reasons. Why do you need to amplify anything billions of times in order to detect it? According to their pseudo science there are billions if not trillions of these viruses in the host. That is the point otherwise they would be harmless. Most people do not realise that typically they grow the virus from cancer cells and inject stuff like antibiotics which themselves contain exosomes (indistinguishable from a virus particle) as explaned above. If you understand German, Germ Theory demolished in 90 minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNTilFKem7w&t=415s
I cannot vouch for the subtitles.
I have a degree in Physics. It's shocking what these 'medical' doctors define as science.
FTM888, thanks for explaining the PCR more in depth. I did get suspicious about the numbers therefore was looking at the uncertainty of test rather than method which is more my field.
Are you aware of SARS-Cov-2 being isolated and characterised?
Martin, precisely my suggestion as well, they are using it to terrorise populations and justify/hide their own mistakes.
It’s a minefield for me as I’m not medical and before this I knew nothing about this subject, but I think this is the discovery document from China and it was done by RT-PCR. The comments are interesting.
The novel virus is then renamed to SARS-CoV-2 by a committee of the ICTV
The disease is named Covid-19 by the WHO
This is a link to a paper that is being claimed (on a twitter exchange between my fiance & a microbiologist) to prove a link of the virus to the disease. You need to go to the PDF doc as this is the original 50 page paper. Firstly, the study is on the Syrian Hamster (they may have a system identical to humans but i suspect not), and at the top of page 11 it clearly states 'None of the SARS-CoV-2-infected and mock-infected animals died'. I@m no expert on the subject but would appreciate the views of someone more conversant with the medical terminology used in the paper. i.e PCR used to measure viral load and viral presence (and we know the limitations of PCR for these purposes).
Just take a look at PrincipiaScientifica - sorry I can't post the link, but if you look at FARCE: UN PCR Test Reads Any Human DNA as Covid 19 Positive - written by John O'Sullivan. This seems to indicate that "test results" are put into piles of positive and negative, with more positives in the area where they want to impose local lockdowns! More ammunition I would say! Jenny Harries, our deputy scientific officer, had an article on this website about masks being not being effective.
Veritas - I posted something this morning in Activism, then noticed that you had also posted here in July about the PCR scam, so I'm putting it here as well:
Coronavirus: Tests 'could be picking up dead virus'
And from the BBC of all people. This is what myself and others have been saying for months. The test is rubbish! This whole cases thing is a scam! The BBC article is much bigger than this if you want to read it, but this is the bare bones of it. 'The main PCR test used to diagnose coronavirus is so sensitive it could be picking up fragments of dead virus from old infections, scientists say. Most people are infectious only for about a week, but could test positive weeks afterwards. Researchers say this could be leading to an over-estimate of the current scale of the pandemic. When you take a coronavirus test, you get a "yes" or "no" answer. There is no indication of how much virus was in the sample, or how likely it is to be an active infection. A person shedding a large amount of active virus, and a person with leftover fragments from an infection that's already been cleared, would receive the same - positive - test result.' In Italy, which had its peak earlier than the UK, "for several weeks we were over-estimating cases" because of people who acquired the infection several weeks before they were identified as positive.' Think of all those people who died 'tested positive' to Covid19!
@Grumpy Cat Thanks, I think this would sufficiently back up my unscientific rant 😁
To speak the truth, it took me 15 minutes to come up with that pseudo-scientific analysis.
I think it would be interesting to see if Babylon Health were doing these tests.Another conflict of interest! Of course they have changed the name of the virus now we know that Certificate Of Vaccination Information Data -19 is what it really means. So you can't be "vaccinated" against it, everyone will be vaccinated with it - unless we take a stand.
I have two issues with this discussion.
1. Arguing about numbers, charts and graphs... if you listen to this:
Matt Wancock clearly says, those graphs, charts and numbers "are not true". So regardless of what evidence you, I or anyone else will bring up, it won't change the mind of this government to proceed towards the total utter controll of everyone.
2. RT-PCR tests. Arguing about it's results and so on is absolutely pointless. I saw only 1 comment towards this direction, but with reference to some BBC. I have better reference to this and he is called Kary B. Mullins himself ! Yes ! The inventor of those PCR "tests" said it himself when he found out that it's being used for testing people for HIV virus and he clearly stated: "These tests are not for viruses! They are great manufacturing tool, but very bad diagnostic tool." Unfortunately Mullins died last year, but David Crow - Canadian researcher followed on this. Long, but very interesting reading. See it for yourself:
And one last thing. If you look into the document call Protocol real-time assay for detection if sars-cov-2 and you look at the covid's DNA code in second row and you compare it with DNA code for Homo Sapiens primary assembly chromosome 8 right at the bottom called "origin". You'll find out that those 2 codes are identical, so because there is no test for covid, they simply used PCR test to detect part of our DNA called chromosome 8 and they call it "the virus". Worst part of this is that they are trying to make a vaccine for this. Why we not taking actions ? Why we not elect someone like David Icke into politics and not making him our PM ? If we would do this this or next month, by end of this years we would be first real free nation in the world.
Man, I was with you and enjoying your points right up until the end. That is a shockingly devisive idea and do you really believe that by voting someone into politics is going to fix it? BoJo and his band of merry f@ckwits are not the Root cause. Not even close
Let's dream for a second. Let's say hypotetically, that we would be able to get David into politics, everyone awoke would be asked to vote for him and from what I seen at least 35 000 people, who's attended the London's March for freedom would vote for him definitely. So let's say hypotetically, we will be able to get him into politics. Media would be forced to report about him and to play his message to the public as he will be officially running a campaing for PM, now if the majority will vote for him, and rest of sleeping sheeple will be divided between Boris and other parties, we will succeed and David can make a change ! I think we owe him that much for all the hard work he did in a last 30 years exposing this all, I think Britain owes him this much for not giving up.
I can see where you are coming from. There are many in this area that have never given up but they have not taken flights of fancy - the lizard topic is David’s downfall, as he is wrong. A misunderstanding of ancient text can do that. Ian R Crane, as an example, would be a much better candidate. Now, the only reason I am going down this path with this topic is to highlight how, already, two people have diverging ideas about the same topic. This is politics!
My main focal point in all this; what is the root cause and how do we eliminate that from the equation? Parliament no longer exists therefore cannot be the root cause or even part of the solution. So.... 🤔
Here is an interesting piece by prof Carl Henegan- a few minutes in starts the interview and he discusses the detail around the importance of the number of cycles within the test (each cycle multiplies the RNA in the sample):- https://tv.spectator.co.uk/event/the-week-in-60-minutes-with-andrew-neil?fbclid=IwAR0xPIYlmtOVgk-VuJaz1gxfaMCsY3_u5cljFA9Y4SeFMtSCzgtGIfwJOfM
Are we being scammed? Undoubtedly. Reports of rises in coronavirus cases are all utterly meaningless. The PCR tests create too many false positives/negatives and are thus not fit for purpose.
Looking closely at the facts, the conclusion is that RT-PCR should NOT be used as a diagnostic tool, since the PCR test was not specifically designed to detect the presence of any viral infection, not least the alleged 'COVID 19 virus'.
The reason is that the intended use of the PCR was, and still is, to apply it as a manufacturing technique being able to replicate DNA sequences millions and billions of times, and NOT as a diagnostic tool to detect RNA viruses.
The late Kary Mullis himself, the inventor of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technology, regarded it as a wholly unsuitable way to test for and detect any viral infection.
So basically, the test is useless and simply a part of the SAGE COVID 19 pandemic propaganda lie
I'd like to add this video by Ivor Cummins
"The ultimate update on our viral issue, bar none - Sept 8th 2020 . Get educated guys and gals - or keep your head in the sand while your errant leaders destroy society around you... ;-) DOWNLOAD IT HERE: https://t.co/P1UU8bZMKE?amp=1. - you all have full permission to upload it wherever you want. Lockdown efficacy analysis papers: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/zg89tdgzkq... Hope-Simpson's stunning book: https://www.dropbox.com/s/4yda40j4hf9... Finally, thank you so much, for what you can do to support me and more importantly - the mission to share good science!"
here's some more:
https://www.rcpath.org/uploads/assets/90111431-8aca-4614-b06633d07e2a3dd9/Guidance-and-SOP-COVID-19-Testing-NHS-Laboratories.pdf
https://twitter.com/LaurenceBettle/status/1304184589393551361
https://twitter.com/FatEmperor/status/1304183943479074816
https://twitter.com/EthicalSkeptic/status/1304250461164314626
and this:
https://lockdownsceptics.org/radical-uncertainty-and-government-innumeracy/
and this:
https://twitter.com/CillianDeGascun/status/1305250887246458880
A short thread on PCR #SARSCoV2 There’s been a lot of discussion recently about the use of PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) for the diagnosis of #SARSCoV2 infection, and the interpretation of its results. 1/n
The PCR test leaves so much wanting.
-The test doesn't pretend to test for Covid19, but SARS-Cov-2, which can cause many coronaviruses.
-If any test is to be used as a diagnostic tool, then it is meaningless without some assessment of its accuracy, i.e. a different test, with a (known) high accuracy should be used for calibration, before the PCR is rolled out as a diagnostic tool.
-Assuming the estimated false positive range obtained from other similar-type tests of 0.8-4.0% is accurate (one hell of an assumption), means that unless the reported positive test rate from the PCR is in excess of this, you cannot actually report that there have been any positive test results.
-The more tests that are carried out, the higher the false positive rate will be (not just the number of positives), because testing will inevitably be done to a lower standard, allowing for greater contamination.
I am a research scientist (ok, not an immunobiologist, but still..) and I cannot credit the shortcomings of this system. And even if you take as gospel the results of these tests, overwhelmingly, the people who are getting tested are those who have symptoms, so, the rate for the general public will certainly be much, much lower, yet, 20/100,000 is the positive test threshold for implementing quarantine.
Whats the point in testing can we not know if we have have a cough or cold when we sneeze or cough ive got to hand it to corony it sure has got some stamina to infect so many people worldwide