CORONA HOAX/NO RELIABLE TEST AVAILABLE
PCR the ultimate in virus identification tests. Actually a joke , a hoax , a scam , a ploy , a fraud a sample” is collected from a sick person. Who decided the blood or spinal fluid etc will have the sickness causing virus ? Even if something can be identified and isolated , it represents the result ,the effect of that sickness . It doesn’t represent the cause . Even if that particular something is capable of causing sickness in another healthy person , it doesn’t represent the cause of the sickness.
start with “Asymptomatic carriers”. This is not a “truth”; these are just words. Are they true? These are supposedly well people, who supposedly are infected and thus, “test positive”. There are also “false positives”, who are well people who are supposedly not infected, who “test positive”. See, there is no distinction, and no way to tell which is which, because both are well people who test positive. There is no second test to take to distinguish between “well”, “positive”, infected vs “well”, “positive”, not infected.
The test is greatly flawed and makes plenty of insane assumptions, as follows.
The test does not actually test for COVID19 at all. It only tests for three other coronaviruses, which are responsible for the common cold.
The test does not actually test for coronaviruses in you. It attempts to use your spit, and then grows them in a “reagent” and multiplies them by 2, from 20 times, to 40 times. Note, 2 to the 40th power is a growth of 1 trillion times. It is not said what the reagent is. But we all know and have been told that viruses are dormant, and might not even be alive at all, and need to invade a human host cell to grow. So the growth mediums in the test kits are likely what is commonly used as growth mediums, which is, shockingly, human fetal immortal cancer cell lines.
A human cell can be 1 million times larger than a virus. There is no way to prevent pre contamination of viruses already existing in cells. Cells are not sterile. And 10% of the human genome is viral DNA. So they are not even testing for COVID19 in you, they are really testing to see what kind of viruses will grow up to 1 trillion times more, from a human fetal immortal cancer cell line that has been given some of your spit. It’s totally frankinstein insanity, and not scientific in any way.
The only way to really know if a virus is new, and spreading, would be to have a real test kit that has actually been tested to work. Then, to test 100,000 healthy people, who all test negative. Then, let time pass. Then, use the identical test kit to test them again, to see if any of them test positive. This, nor any other kind of test, has never validated any of the test kits, or the virus.
The test kits are so flawed, that a person is tested from 10-15 times. Then, a percentage of those tests are positive and some are negative. And then a judgement call is made. Some people who test as little as 4/5 tests being negative, is counted as a positive.
Other scientists have said the tests give “impossible” results. They appear to be less reliable than coin flips. Or less reliable than trying to diagnose a disease by looking at a person’s shadow. At least a shadow is based on an outline of a person in the sun.
“What is the difference between an asymptomatic carrier and a false positive?” If they could say, they would say that the Asymptomatic carrier actually has it. When pressed how they would know that, and distinguish between the two, other than the test kit, which was already used, they drew a blank, and had no idea how to answer the question. Nobody at a hospital knew. Nobody at the public health department could say. The CDC does not say. The FDA does not say.
This is the achilles heel, the weak spot in the whole thing. If this was a real outbreak, there would not be any problem to this question. Everyone around the world would instantly know the answer. There can be no answer. Thus, it’s all a fraud and a hoax.
When health experts say: a given virus tests has, for instance, an accuracy rate of 95%, then people think: aha, a positive test result means they have the virus with a probability of 95% (almost certain). In reality, that’s not how it works at all, It depends on how prevalent the virus is in the population and how many people get tested.
Let’s do some math: A general example (applicable to any disease): assume in a certain population, 1 percent has a certain disease, so out of 100,000 people, 1000 have the disease. If all 100,000 get tested, then 5000 people (5%) get a false positive. That means when a tested person gets a positive test result, that doesn’t mean they have a 95% probability of actually having the disease, but in fact, they have a 16.7% probability of having it or an 83.3% probability of not having it (5/6). This is because 1000 real positives + 5000 false positives = 6000 positives.That’s 6000 positives of which only 1000 have the disease. 5/6 = 83.3%. So, the more people get tested, the more false positives will emerge.
What’s worse, if someone gets tested several times, the probability of an individual false positive increases incrementally.
If the accuracy rate of a test is 95% and a person goes to a preliminary testing 10 times, then the probability is 40 % to get at least one false positive test result, whether they have anything or not.
1 -(0.95 to the power of 10).
=1 -0.5987
=0.4013
=40.13%
Almost like flipping a coin.
If the accuracy rate of a test is only 90% and a person goes to a preliminary testing 10 times, then the probability is 75 % for at least one false positive test result.
For serious diseases, a false positive test can have serious consequences, because of the Nocebo effect (opposite of placebo). The acute fear of death after a deadly diagnosis itself can kill.
With that let’s return to the current Corona virus:
Most Corona fatalities had a preexisting condition. When they die AND tested positive for corona as well, they are counted as corona fatalities and nobody asks for the actual cause of death.
As a matter of fact “Chinese officials have unearthed cases of people testing negative six times already before the seventh test confirmed they indeed are positive.” This has also been the case in Thailand and Singapore.
Neither the WHO nor any western government give an accuracy rate for the novel SarsCoV2 virus test.
Health experts urge “Coronavirus: a reliable test is badly needed. We don’t have one”
As mentioned above, the only number available is the one from south China, where “The accuracy rate of the test is only 30 to 50 per cent”, according to Wang Chen, president of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences.
In other words: people tested positive in south china have a 50 – 70 percent probability of not having the corona virus. This means if any person get’s tested 3 times in china, they will almost certainly get at least one positive result, whether they have a corona virus or not.
If we take the middle value of a 40% accuracy rate, if a person in south China gets tested 3 times, then we take:
1- (0.4 to the power of 3)
=1-0.064
=0.936
=93.6% probability of at least one false positive result, whether they have anything or not.
Potential false-positive rate among the ‘asymptomatic infected individuals’ in close contacts of COVID-19 patients].
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/32133832/
There are no reliable tests for a specific COVID-19 virus. There are no reliable agencies or media outlets for reporting numbers of actual COVID-19 virus cases. This needs to be addressed first and foremost. Every action and reaction to COVID-19 is based on totally flawed data and we simply can not make accurate assessments.
The ‘gold standard’ in testing for COVID-19 is laboratory isolated/purified coronavirus particles free from any contaminants and particles that look like viruses but are not, that have been proven to be the cause of the syndrome known as COVID-19 and obtained by using proper viral isolation methods and controls (not PCR that is currently being used or Serology /antibody tests which do not detect virus as such).
PCR basically takes a sample of your cells and amplifies any DNA to look for ‘viral sequences’, i.e. bits of non-human DNA that seem to match parts of a known viral genome.
The problem is the test is known not to work.
It uses ‘amplification’ which means taking a very very tiny amount of DNA and growing it exponentially until it can be analysed. Obviously any minute contaminations in the sample will also be amplified leading to potentially gross errors of discovery.
Additionally, it’s only looking for partial viral sequences, not whole genomes, so identifying a single pathogen is next to impossible even if you ignore the other issues.
The Mickey Mouse test kits being sent out to hospitals, at best, tell analysts you have some viral DNA in your cells. Which most of us do, most of the time. It may tell you the viral sequence is related to a specific type of virus – say the huge family of coronavirus. But that’s all.
The idea these kits can isolate a specific virus like COVID-19 is nonsense.
And that’s not even getting into the other issue – viral load.
If you remember the PCR works by amplifying minute amounts of DNA. It therefore is useless at telling you how much virus you may have.
And that’s the only question that really matters when it comes to diagnosing illness. Everyone will have a few virus kicking round in their system at any time, and most will not cause illness because their quantities are too small. For a virus to sicken you you need a lot of it, a massive amount of it. But PCR does not test viral load and therefore can’t determine if a osteogenesis is present in sufficient quantities to sicken you.
If you feel sick and get a PCR test any random virus DNA might be identified even if they aren’t at all involved in your sickness which leads to false diagnosis.
And coronavirus are incredibly common. A large percentage of the world human population will have covi DNA in them in small quantities even if they are perfectly well or sick with some other pathogen.
Do you see where this is going yet?
If you want to create a totally false panic about a totally false pandemic – pick a coronavirus.
They are incredibly common and there’s tons of them. A very high percentage of people who have become sick by other means (flu, bacterial pneumonia, anything) will have a positive PCR test for covi even if you’re doing them properly and ruling out contamination, simply because covis are so common.
There are hundreds of thousands of flu and pneumonia victims in hospitals throughout the world at any one time.
All you need to do is select the sickest of these in a single location – say Wuhan – administer PCR tests to them and claim anyone showing viral sequences similar to a coronavirus (which will inevitably be quite a few) is suffering from a ‘new’ disease.
Since you already selected the sickest flu cases a fairly high proportion of your sample will go on to die.
You can then say this ‘new’ virus has a CFR higher than the flu and use this to infuse more concern and do more tests which will of course produce more ‘cases’, which expands the testing, which produces yet more ‘cases’ and so on and so on.
Before long you have your ‘pandemic’, and all you have done is use a simple test kit trick to convert the worst flu and pneumonia cases into something new.
Now just run the same scam in other countries. Making sure to keep the fear message running high so that people will feel panicky and less able to think
Your only problem is going to be that – due to the fact there is no actual new deadly pathogen but just regular sick people you are mislabelling – your case numbers, and especially your deaths, are going to be way too low for a real new deadly virus pandemic.
start with “Asymptomatic carriers”. This is not a “truth”; these are just words. Are they true? These are supposedly well people, who supposedly are infected and thus, “test positive”. There are also “false positives”, who are well people who are supposedly not infected, who “test positive”. See, there is no distinction, and no way to tell which is which, because both are well people who test positive. There is no second test to take to distinguish between “well”, “positive”, infected vs “well”, “positive”, not infected.
Different people react differently to seasonal changes in climate . its not Virus .
Then there is poison - in medicine , food , water , atmosphere. Its not virus .
In the winter seasons from 2013/14 to 2016/17, an estimated average of 5,290,000 ILI - influenza like illness – ( note “like” ) cases occurred in Italy, corresponding to an incidence of 9%. • More than 68,000 deaths attributable to flu epidemics were estimated in the study period. • Italy showed a higher influenza attributable excess mortality compared to other European countries. especially in the elderly.
In recent years, Italy has been registering peaks in death rates, particularly among the elderly during the winter season. “Influenza” epidemics have been indicated as one of the potential determinants of such an excess. The objective of our study was to estimate the influenza-attributable contribution to excess mortality during the influenza seasons from 2013/14 to 2016/17 in Italy.
Estimated excess deaths of 7,027,-- 20,259,-- 15,801 and 24,981 attributable to influenza epidemics in the 2013/14, 2014/15, 2015/16 and 2016/17, respectively. The average annual mortality excess rate per 100,000 ranged from 11.6 to 41.2 with most of the influenza-associated deaths per year registered among the elderly. However children less than 5 years old also reported a relevant influenza attributable excess death rate in the 2014/15 and 2016/17 seasons (1.05/100,000 and 1.54/100,000 respectively).
Over 68,000 deaths were attributable to influenza epidemics in the study period. The observed excess of deaths is not completely unexpected, given the high number of fragile very old subjects living in Italy.
Seasonal influenza epidemics make a substantial contribution to the worldwide annual mortality rate, in particular among elderly individuals aged 65 years and over. Influenza associated deaths are highly variable by country and season (Iuliano et al., 2018).
Factors influencing this variability may include environmental temperature; and population demographics (e.g., the proportion of elderly individuals and/or of individuals with chronic conditions).
During the winter seasons 2014/15 and 2016/17, an excess of all-cause mortality was reported in Europe.
Italian doctors reported that they had already observed severe cases of pneumonia in northern Italy at
the end of last year. However, genetic analyses now show that the Covid19 virus only appeared in
Italy in January of this year. "The severe pneumonia diagnosed in Italy in November and December
must therefore be due to a different pathogen,“ a virologist noted. This once again raises the question
what role the Covid19 virus, or other factors, actually play in the Italian situation.
Italian doctors who died "during the Corona crisis“, many of
whom were up to 90 years old and didn’t actively participate in the crisis at all. Today, all years of
birth on the list have been removed (see however the last archive version). A strange procedure.
also received the following message from an observer in Italy, who gives further details
about the dramatic situation there, which is obviously due to far more than a virus:
"In recent weeks, most of the Eastern European nurses who worked 24 hours a day, 7 days a week
supporting people in need of care in Italy have left the country in a hurry. This is not least because of
the panic-mongering and the curfews and border closures threatened by the "emergency
governments“. As a result, old people in need of care and disabled people, some without relatives,
were left helpless by their carers.
Many of these abandoned people then ended up after a few days in the hospitals, which had been
permanently overloaded for years, because they were dehydrated, among other things. Unfortunately,
the hospitals lacked the personnel who had to look after the children locked up in their apartments
because schools and kindergartens had been closed. This then led to the complete collapse of the care
for the disabled and the elderly, especially in those areas where even harder "measures“ were ordered,
and to chaotic conditions.
The nursing emergency, which was caused by the panic, temporarily led to many deaths among those
in need of care and increasingly among younger patients in the hospitals. These fatalities then served
to cause even more panic among those in charge and the media, who reported, for example, "another
475 fatalities“, "The dead are being removed from hospitals by the army“, accompanied by pictures of
coffins and army trucks lined up.
However, this was the result of the funeral directors‘ fear of the "killer virus“, who therefore refused
their services. Moreover, on the one hand there were too many deaths at once and on the other hand
the government passed a law that the corpses carrying the coronavirus had to be cremated. In Catholic
Italy, few cremations had been carried out in the past. Therefore there were only a few small
crematoria, which very quickly reached their limits. Therefore the deceased had to be laid out in
different churches.
In principle, this development is the same in all countries. However, the quality of the health system
has a considerable influence on the effects. Therefore, there are fewer problems in Germany, Austria
or Switzerland than in Italy, Spain or the USA. However, as can be seen in the official figures, there is
no significant increase in the mortality rate. Just a small mountain that came from this tragedy."
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3076334/coronavirus-strange-pneumonia-seen-
In recent years, Italy has been registering peaks in death rates, particularly among the elderly , during the winter season. A mortality rate of 10.7 per 1,000 inhabitants was observed in the winter season 2014/2015 (more than 375,000 deaths in absolute terms), corresponding to an estimated 54,000 excess deaths (+9.1%) as compared to 2014, representing the highest reported mortality rate since the Second World War in Italy.
Excess mortality for influenza in Italy in the above mentioned seasons has been previously explored in a multi-country study, analysing mortality data from a limited sample of the Italian population, and in a study focusing on a single Italian region.
The present study aims to investigate the two mortality peaks observed in Italy during 2015 and 2017, using the following data: a) census mortality data from all causes from 2013 to 2017; b) seasonal influenza like-illness surveillance data from 2013/14 to 2016/17 (week 42 to week 17); c) environmental temperature data for the same years.
The final objective was to estimate the “influenza”-attributable deaths and the contribution of temperature variation to the excess mortality during the above mentioned influenza seasons, using a multiplicative Poisson regression model.?????? ( simulation as always ????? ).
More than one hundred Italian weather stations contribute to the NOAA database, providing daily average, minimum and maximum temperatures. Overall, Italian daily average, minimum and maximum temperatures were obtained computing the means of daily average, minimum temperatures and maximum temperatures from each weather station, weighted by the populations of the Italian provinces where the stations were located for all of the study period (winter seasons from 2013/14 to 2016/17). Weekly average temperatures as well as weekly minimum and maximum temperatures were obtained calculating the weekly average of daily average, minimum and maximum temperatures. Based on these overall weekly temperatures, we estimated the expected weekly minimum and maximum temperature using a general linear model with a yearly seasonal variation applied to the data of the entire study period. Weeks with extreme temperatures (EC) were defined as weeks with an average temperature above the average of the maximum weekly temperatures or lower than the average of the minimum weekly temperatures.
Statistical analysis . ( ??? ) .The number of influenza-attributable deaths was estimated using the FluMOMO algorithm, based on the weekly Influenza Activity (IA) and ET (EuroMOMO, 2018b). For this analysis, we used two IA indicators: 1) the ILI incidence and 2) the Goldstein index (ILI × percentage of positive specimens) (Goldstein et al., 2011). Up to two-weeks-delayed effects of the explanatory variables were considered in the model. An explanatory factor reflecting the deviation of environmental temperature from the average maximum/minimum temperatures was introduced in the model in order to take into account a potential confounding effect of temperature on influenza excess mortality, as many Italian regions are affected by very cold weather in some winter weeks (e.g. January 2017).
Very cold weather is recognized to have a potential impact on the excess mortality from all causes (Nielsen et al., 2011). Therefore, we estimated the influenza-attributable deaths among older adults, adjusting for Extreme Temperatures (ET), defined as weeks with a mean temperature above the average maximum temperature or below the average. Periods with excess cold might be bad in the winter, but in summer, it may have a benign effect and opposite for periods with excess warmth.
Therefore, the winter effect of temperature is included with an opposite warm (protective) and cold (harmful) effect. The method has been described elsewhere (Vestergaard et al., 2017). In brief, we adopted a Poisson regression time-series model ( simulation again ) with over-dispersion, where the weekly absolute number of deaths from all causes was the outcome variable and IA and ET the explanatory variables. In the results section we reported results including both models with and without the ET effect. We corrected the model by annual trend, and seasonality. Seasonality was expressed as the sum of two sine waves of one year and half year periods, respectively (Nielsen et al., 2018).
Analyses were performed separately for the age groups 0–4, 5–14, 15–64 and 65+ years of age, as well as for all ages. The statistical analysis was performed using STATA version 14 (StataCorp, 2014).
Results … National deaths … A total of 1,457,038 deaths were registered in Italy during the study period. 2013 /14 to 20116/17
Table 1 provides the absolute number of all-cause deaths, the overall crude mortality rate (per 1,000 inhabitants), the overall standardized mortality rate (per 1,000 inhabitants) and the standardized mortality rate by age group and by season. The number of deaths and the mortality rates from all causes increased by age. The 2014/15 and 2016/17 seasons showed the highest overall crude and standardized mortality rates ( better registering ?? ).
Influenza-like illness surveillance data During the study period, an average of 5,290,000 (range 4,542,000–6,299,000) ILI cases were estimated in Italy, corresponding to a cumulative average incidence of 9% (range 8%–11%) in the Italian population. The highest estimated incidence was observed in children younger than 5 years (average of 23%, range 21%–26%) and in adolescents (average of 15%, range 12%–18%). The 2014/15 season showed the highest estimated number of cases, with a total of 6,300,000 ILI cases. The lowest number of cases was observed in the 2013/14 season, with 4,540,000 ILI estimated cases (Table 2).
Influenza-attributable mortality. We observed two peaks, one for the 2014/15 and one for the 2016/17 season. These two seasons were also characterized by a high ILI incidence, particularly high for people aged 65 years and over (data not shown).
The average annual mortality excess rate (MR) ranged from 40.6 to 70.2 per 100,000. The total number of excess ILI-attributable deaths during the 2014/15 season was 41,066, -- 65.6% higher compared to the previous season??. During the 2016/17 season, the number of ILI-attributable excess deaths was 43,336, -- 57.9% more than the previous season??.
Using the Goldstein index??, the total number of excess deaths attributable to influenza in the 4-season study period was 68,068.
Temperature associated mortality.
Extreme temperatures .. The overall number of deaths attributable to extreme ambient temperature in the study period was 8,820, ranging from 939 during winter 2014/15 to 5,190 during winter 2016/17, corresponding to a 3.6 average MR (range: 1.5 to 8.6, data not shown) per 100,000. Discussion With the present study we show a remarkable excess death attributable to influenza in Italy during the winter seasons 2014/15 and 2016/17, which was independent from mean weekly extreme temperature variations. Our results show that during these two seasons, in Italy, a high proportion of deaths was observed among the elderly (96.1% and 77.7%, respectively).
Scarce data is available on influenza-attributable mortality estimates for single countries in the study period considered. However, some studies have been published that have reported influenza-attributable excess mortality rates in EU countries. In particular, Italy shows a higher influenza attributable excess mortality compared to Denmark in all ages, with highest levels reported in elderly, but for the 0–4 age group where Denmark reported higher rates compared to Italy in all seasons, except for the 2014/2015 season (0.52/100,000 vs 1.05/100,000).
In the UK, estimates of the annual number of deaths directly attributable to influenza range from 4 to 14,000 per year, with an average of around 8,000 per year (Public Health England, 2014). Moreover, influenza-attributable excess deaths using the FluMomo method?? for UK were reported in 2014/15. UK estimates, in terms of absolute numbers, were higher compared to Italian data, in all ages and in particular in the elderly (26,542 vs 19,475 respectively).
Plausible hypotheses regarding the determinants of the observed excess deaths attributable to influenza in Italy, especially in the old population (i.e. 65+), are: i) meteorological factors (low and high temperatures), ii) the amplitude of the at risk population (pools of elderly). Deviation from expected temperature may have a great impact on mortality.
Very low temperatures were registered at the beginning of 2017 in various European countries. Therefore, we decided to adjust our estimates of influenza-associated mortality for extreme temperatures. We found that the impact of extreme temperatures on mortality in Italy was quite limited??, with the exception?? of the 2016/17 season. Despite this impact of extreme low temperatures, most of the excess death rate registered in 2016/17 is attributable to influenza, confirming other observations recorded in Europe. Nevertheless, this is the first study reporting the effect of temperatures on mortality in Italy, and we acknowledge that this association has to be further investigated, also analyzing this factor at sub-national level.
In terms of amplitude of the at risk population, in Italy there are 6.7 million of people aged 75+ (more than 10% of the population) that constitute a large group of fragile subjects, among which the annual death rate is naturally high, around 4%. Among them, a large variation in the absolute number of deaths causes small fluctuations in the mortality rate.
This study has several limitations.
The influenza surveillance system in Italy is based on voluntary general practitioners reporting ILI cases, and the participating general practitioners are not selected with random criteria.
Another important limitation in the surveillance system is related to “virological” surveillance because sampling of influenza testing may be biased towards more samples taken at hospitals, and therefore may overestimate the proportion of positive samples in the population.
These limitations may introduce a potential bias due to the selection of subjects under surveillance. Moreover, the study is based on census mortality data, while previous published studies were based on sample data and limited to regional data. However, the proposed model uses all-cause weekly mortality data, usually available quite in real time in many countries, and can therefore be a valuable tool for monitoring the seasonal impact of influenza.
The study should be validated using cause specific mortality data, which,however,was not available for the entire study period.
Furthermore, it would be valuable to investigate also regional patterns, but such details on mortality were not available in the study period considered. To evaluate whether the association of influenza activity with mortality varied with temperatures, an interaction term of influenza activity and temperatures should be added to model. The adopted statistical model did not include an interaction term between temperatures and IA. This “rigidity” of the model can be considered a limitation and should be overcome in future applications.
Finally, the pattern of the effect of temperature on mortality should be investigated further to be able to obtain more valid estimates of the impact of this effect, e.g. testing different cut-off values for the extreme temperature definition.
Assessment of winter mortality in Italy, during the 2014/15 and 2016/17 seasons, confirmed the hypothesis that influenza was likely to have been the main contributor to the excess mortality seen, especially in the elderly.
Italy
In Europe, as luck would have it, the pandemic first affected northern Italy, namely Lombardy and Veneto, which have by far the largest number of vaccine hesitant people in Europe and probably the world. Veneto strongly opposed the expansion of vaccine mandates. Activists demonstrated for months, with rallies of more than 50,000 people. As a result, the regional government appealed to the Council of State, arguing that the law violated constitutional freedoms and demanded autonomy in health matters. Of note, the WHO then decided to move its European headquarters to Venice, the capital of Veneto.
At the beginning of the disease outbreak, the Italian authorities considered it unnecessary to impose a two-week school quarantine on children returning from a trip to China, in order not to “stigmatize” them. (By contrast, unvaccinated children are stigmatized and prohibited from attending school year round.) Officials disagreed on Covid-19 diagnosis and “crisis measures,” reflecting conflicts between regional parties and medical experts. But the WHO soon managed to take control of the situation and appointed a special advisor, Dr. Gualtiero Walter Ricciardi, who had been forced to resign earlier from the Italian HHS due to a long list of undeclared conflicts of interest, to steer the coronavirus crisis.
Since then, panic and alarm have escalated continuously, as have the Veneto region’s accusations of “anti-scientific” management. Although the country has been in a complete lockdown for weeks, cases keep increasing and the estimated number of deaths is now nearing 3,000.
This sends a frightening signal, but these numbers need to be seen with caution. First, one of the major reasons why Italy is “overwhelmed,” is because of the crisis , its public hospitals were already facing before the epidemic. The number of intensive care units has dropped by half over the last 20 years, dropping from the highest to the lowest number of beds per capita in Europe to around 230 per 100,000 inhabitants. In other words, the situation was already disastrous.
Second, there is a lot of controversy about the number of deaths that can really be ascribed to the epidemic. Testing is not very reliable and suffers many biases. According to Dr.Wolfgang Wodarg, who had chaired the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Health Committee that called an emergency debate on the influence of the pharmaceutical industry in the declaration of the H1N1 flu pandemic by WHO in 2009, “the tests are currently not measuring the incidence of coronavirus diseases, but the activity of the specialists searching for them.”
Many experts also disagree on the mortality rate of Covid-19. While the WHO gives estimates as high as 3.4%, renowned epidemiologists such as John Ioannidis consider the risk is probably much lower, perhaps 0.125%, for which there are no reasons to take such draconian measures.
France
In France, too, declarations of the Covid-19 pandemic seemed to have a flair for strategic time and place. When Minister of Health Agnes Buzyn suddenly left office to replace a candidate who was running for mayor of Paris (he had to step down after a sex scandal), the coronavirus crisis seemed to be reasonably manageable. But the Covid-19 threat arose again at an opportune time — to ban large protests against a highly unpopular law that slashed pensions and on the eve of local March elections. After the first round of voting, a complete lockdown was announced. The former health minister, who wasn’t elected mayor, expressed her regret for leaving office during the coronavirus crisis, saying that she knew from the start that the epidemic would escalate and soon turn into a major catastrophe…
But a disaster in France is easy to predict, as the situation is very similar to Italy. 1,300 public hospital doctors have been on administrative strike for almost a year. They refused to share the responsibility and decisions of a state that no longer provides minimal funds to run public health services. In the last two decades, the available number of beds has been reduced by 100,000 and the remaining facilities are largely understaffed.
Patients who died after waiting endless hours in the emergency room were already frequently reported by the media long before the coronavirus epidemic.
So the former health minister, who had received fierce criticism for her inability to solve this lingering hospital crisis, knew perfectly well that the coronavirus situation would further exacerbate the problem. Recently, when President Macron visited doctors fighting the epidemic to show his support, medical staff took the opportunity to express their anger towards his disastrous health policies in front of the camera.
… [health authorities] replied that there was not enough scientific evidence to prove efficacy and warned against potential side effects of the [Chloroquine or Plaquenil], preferring to focus their efforts to find new molecules and develop a new vaccine, with France’s Sanofi Pasteur included in the coronavirus vaccine competition.
The silent war in the treatment against Covid-19.
Finally, the Coronavirus epidemic reveals the huge discrepancy between the WHO health strategies and the reality for scientists and doctors who put patients’ lives first.
The current power struggle in France about coronavirus strategies between health officials and the country’s leading expert is truly eye opening. Professor Didier Raoult, who is one of the world’s top 5 scientists on communicable diseases and leads the high tech research center on infectious diseases, IHU – mediterranée Marseilles, argued that the approach of mass quarantine is both inefficient and outdated.
Early on, Dr. Raoult suggested the use of hydroxychloroquine (Chloroquine or Plaquenil), a well-known, simple, and inexpensive drug. By mid-February, clinical trials at his institute and in China already confirmed that the drug could reduce the viral load and bring spectacular improvement. The Chinese scientists published their first trials on more than 100 patients and announced that the Chinese National Health Commission would recommend Chloroquine in their new guidelines to treat Covid-19. Chloroquine has sever side effects.
…last October, the French minister of health suddenly decided to put this long used over-the-counter drug on the list of “controlled substances” and make it a prescription drug.
As a member of a similar French committee, Dr. Raoult immediately shared the great news with health authorities. But they replied that there was not enough scientific evidence to prove efficacy and warned against potential side effects of the drug.
But Dr. Raoult and 600 members of his institute continued their work and confirmed similar results in a trial of 24 patients that was published March 3, 2020.
Dr. Raoult has recorded daily videos to share his research and knowledge, sometimes reaching half a million views in a couple of days. Hospitals and general practitioners started to treat their patients with the drug until it quickly went out of stock.
In fact, for an unknown reason, last October, the French minister of health suddenly decided to put this long used over-the-counter drug on the list of “controlled substances” and make it a prescription drug.
While the WHO has repeatedly praised China and South Korea, for their “efficient response” using draconian quarantine measures, there has been no mention of the fact that those countries are using Chloroquine.
Now, a month later, under the growing pressure of doctors and the media, the government has finally decided to “consider more trials” of this protocol, and Sanofi Pasteur has announced that it will offer enough doses to potentially treat 300,000 patients.
Although Chloroquine was cited second on the WHO’s original list of drugs to be evaluated for coronavirus treatment as a drug on its list of “essential medicines,” the WHO has not yet released any information about it and has not even mentioned the four clinical trials that received official European Union approval.
Interestingly, on February 26, the United Kingdom put Chloroquine on its list of drugs that can no longer be exported outside the country. In the United States, a white paper, published on March 13 by researchers from the National Academy of Science and Stanford Medical School, proposes that “the United States of America and other countries should immediately authorize and indemnify medical doctors for prescribing chloroquine to treat COVID-19.”
It looks as if the WHO and our Western governments have decided to keep fueling the panic and raising the alert level, pushing the “Global Health Security Threat” narrative to the hilt.
How much longer with this global lockdown last? Officials say “until a new vaccine has been developed,” which will probably be in fast track mode by a well-known philanthropist after most courts in the world have ruled that mandatory vaccination does not violate human rights.
Or perhaps until the economy has completely crashed and can be rebuilt on a “healthy basis”? Here is a clue: the European Central Bank has launched a “Pandemic Emergency Purchase Program” that will last until “the coronavirus Covid-19 crisis phase is over, but in any case not before the end of the year”!
David Crown, a Canadian software and telecommunications engineer, who has degree in mathematics and biology has studied more than 10,000 scientific papers on 21st century infections, such as Ebola, sars, and others, has raised fundamental question about way in which viral epidemics are identified and treated.
Crowe describes the current response as a ‘rush to judgement, based on the rapid application of an unproven test, made worse by the use of powerful unproven drugs with toxic side-effects on those who test positive.’ The Chinese seems to have tacitly acknowledged the issue by starting to change the way diagnoses are recorded – see below.
Some of the evidence for his claim emerged in the aftermath of the last global epidemic caused by a coronavirus known as SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome). It was first reported in Asia in February 2003, spreading to more than two dozen countries around the world but was contained within the year. Out of the 8,098 who caught it, 774 died.
After the epidemic, which triggered much the same response as the current emergency, doctors and scientists began publishing insider accounts of what had happened in journals that are rarely seen by the general public. Some of them concerned the very toxic drugs used to treat SARS patients.
These studies suggest that in the early days, patients with pneumonia were diagnosed with SARS because the symptoms – fever, headache, an aching body and a dry cough -were similar to those of pneumonia and flu. But the drugs they were given were much more toxic than those used for pneumonia, which could be why SARS gained the reputation for being such a deadly disease. At least some of the patients died from the treatment, not from the disease.
Damage to blood cells and the liver
For example, a report commissioned by a World Health Organization expert panel concluded that the antiviral drug ribavirin, widely used during the epidemic, caused the destruction of red blood cells (hemolytic anaemia) in one-third to two-thirds of patients and that 75% of them developed liver problems. The drug is also known to cause ‘flu-like symptoms such as fever, difficulty breathing, body aches and pains as well as being able to trigger psychiatric conditions such as depression, psychosis and aggressive behaviour.
Other reports showed that high dose corticosteroids, also widely used, caused lasting side effects, most notably serious neurological and bone problems.
There is also evidence that these drugs, with their extremely unpleasant side effects, contributed to their deaths. Crowe’s research found that in the countries most affected by SARS, the rich ones – Singapore, Hong Kong and Canada – had a higher death rate than the poorer countries – China and Vietnam.
http://healthinsightuk.org/2020/02/12/coronavirus-a-reliable-test-is-badly-needed-we-dont-have-one/
A vaccine war.
In 2020, vaccines could weigh even more heavily in US elections. In fact, one could almost say that a vaccine war is going on across the US. After California, states like New Jersey, Maine, Connecticut, Virginia, Hawaii, Colorado and many others are trying to adopt harsher vaccine laws. But vaccine freedom advocates are getting more organized, too, putting pressure on elected officials and candidates and even introducing their own legislation. For example, after the New Jersey legislature twice failed to pass a repeal of the religious exemption, even though Speaker Steven Sweeney vowed to “go to war” to get it passed, legislators proposed several vaccine safety bills. The Maryland legislature refused to allow pharmacists to administer vaccines, and in South Dakota, the legislature considered, although rejected, a bill that would have completely prohibited all medical mandates of any kind. Europe too is undergoing a similar wave of coercive legislation and pushback. In Germany, compulsory measles vaccination has just come into force in early March, even though the country has one of the highest coverage rates — 97% one dose, 93% two doses — and very few cases of illness or death. This vote comes two years after Chancellor Angela Merkel announced that there would be no mandatory vaccinations in Germany, as informed consent had “solid historical reasons.” Everywhere in Europe — in Great Britain, Austria, Belgium, Romania, Slovenia, from Ukraine to Spain — mandatory vaccination bills are being introduced. Sadly, informed consent and the Nuremberg Code may now exist only in the museum of democratic values. The new German law is particularly restrictive. There is no option for home schooling, and the measles vaccine obligation applies to adults working in the health and education sectors as well. But German citizens may be ready to fight back. Families and doctors are fighting the mandates in courts, and protests were planned all over the country for March 21, including a major event in Munich with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and activists from all over Europe – until the coronavirus pandemic intervened. Everywhere in Europe — in Great Britain, Austria, Belgium, Romania, Slovenia, from Ukraine to Spain — mandatory vaccination bills are being introduced. Faced with the violation of human rights that their Constitutions guarantee, people have filed complaints with the European Court of Human Rights. The Court, whose jurisdiction covers 49 countries throughout Europe and Eurasia, will hear cases on mandatory vaccination on April 30, 2020 arising from the Czech Republic.
It is undeniable that the coronavirus epidemic has come on the scene at a crucial moment, when people everywhere are in revolt against the power of international financial institutions and multinational pharmaceutical corporations, whose stranglehold on governments is no longer hidden. Many scandals have shaken confidence. The bankruptcy of an aberrant economic system is accelerating, ands attempts to start a third world war are multiplying. It is certain that many are seeking to have Covid-19 serve the political interests of a global governance project.
After having refused all outside help in the management of the pandemic, Iran made a complete about-face by inviting the WHO to its rescue.
Iran called again for lifting the ban and asked the International Monetary Fund for a $5 billion loan to fight the outbreak.
Italy: “ICU wards are overflowing”
by Jon Rappoport March 13, 2020
Some people, even if they have fallen over a cliff, would, on the way down, shout: “The virus must be dangerous! What else could it be?” “People are dying! It’s got to be the virus!” How about this? “The ICU hospital wards in Italy are overflowing. It’s the virus.”
Step back and think. Think it through. Watching a recent interview with an Italian public health official, I had the impression that perhaps several thousand new ICU patients were burdening the hospital system in the northern part of the country. Several thousand out of a national population of 60 million.
Here’s the trick. Before the announcement of the coronavirus epidemic, people who showed up at those hospitals, with flu, flu-like symptoms, lung infections, pneumonia would be placed in the general wards and treated, or even sent home with drugs. But now they would, many of them, be called “presumptive cases” of coronavirus, without any tests at all, or after tests which don’t work (see my prior articles on why the diagnostic tests are useless and deceptive). By labeling these patients “contagious coronavirus cases,” the hospital doctors are forced to send them to the ICU, to “protect others from the infection.” Thus, these ICUs are crowded and overflowing. The press publishes pictures of the ICUs and the hysteria factor bubbles up a few degrees hotter. The press interviews a hospital doctor, and he says, “We’re starting to see a few more children with the virus.” The public reaction? “Incredible! Now even healthy children are getting sick!” I have breaking news. Children do get sick. Like adults, they develop flu-like symptoms. And as with adults, they can now be diagnosed as “presumptive coronavirus cases.”
“But what about people dying in Italy?” As in other countries, people in Italy do die. They always have. Especially old people, who have all sorts of long-term health problems. Labeling them with “coronavirus” at the last minute doesn’t explain the cause of death.
“Healthy people in Italy are dying.” Two points here. First, sometimes these healthy people aren’t really healthy at all. And second, if you were healthy, and you were suddenly diagnosed, for no reason, with a virus you believed was dangerous and even deadly, and then you were isolated in an ICU ward, allowed no visitors, perhaps even put on a ventilator, and then treated with highly toxic antiviral drugs, do you think there is a chance you would die? The whole aim of stage magic is, as we all know, deflection of attention. The audience is guided to look HERE, while the trick is being executed THERE. Here, a woman is being sawed in half. There, she is escaping from the back of the box. In the “epidemic,” HERE is where people are sick and dying and diagnosed. THERE is where a fictional reason is being cooked up to explain why. “But…but…Italy, Italy, Italy, people dying, virus, virus…I don’t get it…” Yes you do. You’re getting the message the public health officials want to shove into your mind. You’re standing on a street corner watching a pro execute his shell game, and you’re falling for it every time.
Italy .. Coronavirus: New explosive information
by Jon Rappoport March 19, 2020
A very brief update. Read this carefully. Many people who were diagnosed as “coronavirus cases” in Italy, and then died, were almost certainly put on antiviral drugs. As you’ll see, below, a significant percentage of these people had prior heart conditions or high blood pressure. But at least one of the antiviral drugs, called ribavirin, carries this very relevant warning, from cardiosmart.org: “Ribavirin may decrease the number of red blood cells in your body. This is called anemia and it can be life-threatening in people who have heart disease or circulation problems.” High blood pressure is a circulatory problem. Understand? Get it? Life threatening .
So how many coronavirus patients have been killed by the administering of ribavirin? And with that, let’s jump in…because there’s more. Much more. For those people who have any belief in the coronavirus… Here’s the basic situation: the Italian health agencies are reporting escalating COV deaths—big fear-story out front… But in the background, other Italian government researchers are combing through patient records, to take a much closer look…to see whether people are dying from the virus or other more obvious causes. Are people dying coincidentally with the virus, or BECAUSE OF the virus? Is the virus a mere harmless passenger in the body, or is it the driving force? The Italian results are astonishing, to understate it by a mile. Bloomberg News has the story: 3/18/2020, “99 percent of those whose died from virus had other illness, Italy says”: “More than 99% [!] of Italy’s coronavirus fatalities were people who suffered from previous medical conditions, according to a study by the country’s national health authority.”
“The Rome-based institute has examined medical records of about 18% of the country’s coronavirus fatalities [so far, because it’s slow work], finding that just three victims [!!], or 0.8% of the total, had no previous pathology [disease]. Almost half of the victims suffered from at least three prior illnesses and about a fourth had either one or two previous conditions.” “More than 75% had high blood pressure, about 35% had diabetes and a third suffered from heart disease.” “The average age of those who’ve died from the virus in Italy is 79.5 [!!!]. As of March 17, 17 people under 50 had died from the disease. All of Italy’s victims under 40 have been males with serious existing medical conditions.”
BANG. Average age of those who’ve died: 79.5. Are you kidding? Lots of prior medical conditions, weakened immune systems, and what this emerging study isn’t saying: all these people had obviously been treated for those prior conditions with toxic medical drugs. Furthermore, once they’d been diagnosed with coronavirus, chances are many of them were put on highly toxic antiviral drugs. Thus delivering the final blow. Imagining the coronavirus was the CAUSE of death would be a ridiculous fantasy. But these people are counted as “coronavirus deaths” by the other Italian reporting agencies, who are jacking up the numbers. Does this remind you of any other reports I’ve been detailing? The elderly people with obvious prior diseases who died in Australia; and the elderly people who were diagnosed as coronavirus cases in the state of Washington—all living in a long-term-care nursing home? Getting the picture?
This death-numbers con - aside from covering up the real causes of death, including MEDICAL - is the forward spear being used to justify locking down and wrecking economies all over the world right now, and that means attacking the people in any way connected to those economies who have to work to make a living. There are statistical vampires at work, using the elderly and sick and dying to feed numbers to health agencies around the planet. Those agencies tap their press contacts, and horror reports emerge, and the unsuspecting public, in economic lockdowns, sit in front of the tube and watch these reports, and inhale the cooked-up fear. Turn your mind to the highest setting, because nothing is riding on this whole deal except the immediate future of humanity. And again, cardiosmart.org: “Ribavirin may decrease the number of red blood cells in your body. This is called anemia and it can be life-threatening in people who have heart disease or circulation problems.”
Corona Bologna Italy:
The Truth begins to leak out. by Jon Rappoport March 17, 2020
The government of Italy, as everyone knows, has locked down the whole country of 60 million people. So how many Italians have died from COV? Even by the standards of the useless and misleading diagnostic tests? Ready? As far as the Italian Higher Institute of Health knows, at this point: Maybe two. Maybe. Try to wrap your mind around that. Good luck. Seems the president of the Italian Higher Institute has some smarts. He understands that people who already have other serious health conditions, which have nothing to do with COV, can and do die from those other conditions, regardless of the fact that they’ve tested positive (on useless tests) for COV. He gets it.
I predict a great future for him. If he keeps shooting his mouth off, he might find himself working as a weed puller in a forest. Or he might suddenly be diagnosed with the virus and find himself in isolation. Grit your teeth and plow through this piece from Rome, 13 March 2020, Agenzia Nova: “Coronavirus: ISS [Italian National Institute of Health]: in Italy there are only two deaths ascertained so far due to Covid-19” (Italian, English) “There may be only two people who died from coronavirus in Italy, who did not present other pathologies. This is what emerges from the medical records examined so far by the Higher Institute of Health, according to what was reported by the President of the Institute [Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS), Italian National Institute of Health], Silvio Brusaferro, during the press conference held today at the Civil Protection in Rome. ‘Positive deceased patients have an average of over 80 years – 80.3 to be exact…The majority of these people are carriers of chronic diseases. Only two people were not presently carriers of [other non-COV] diseases’, but even in these two cases, the examination of the files is not concluded and therefore, causes of death different from Covid-19 could emerge. The president of the ISS has specified that ‘little more than a hundred medical records’ have so far come from hospitals throughout Italy.” “…At present, in fact, the authorities are unable to distinguish those who died from the virus, from those who, on the other hand, are communicated daily to the public, but who were mostly carriers of other serious diseases and who, therefore, would not have died from Covid-19. In response to a question from ‘Agenzia Nova’, in fact, Brusaferro was unable to indicate the exact number of coronavirus deaths. However, the professor clarified that, according to the data analyzed, the vast majority of the victims ‘had serious [non-COV] pathologies and in some cases the onset of an infection of the respiratory tract can lead more easily to death.’ To clarify this point, and provide real data, ‘as we acquire the folders we will go further. However, the populations most at risk are fragile, carriers of multiple diseases’.” Translation into non-medical language: the people dying in Italy have other very serious traditional diseases that have nothing to do with COV, and it’s obvious they could have died, and probably did die, from those other diseases. Nevertheless, we’re locking down the whole country. So, for those people straining to find a reason for the “devastation” overtaking Italy—it’s karma for ancient Rome trying to conquer half the known world; it’s the ghost of Martin Luther obtaining revenge against the Vatican; it’s a bioweapon with the power to cut down millions of people overnight; it’s a virus that came in with a small meteor and crashed outside Milan; it’s Chinese revenge against Marco Polo for stealing the concept of noodles— Take a break, relax, have a plate of pasta, turn on the TV, and because all the stadiums are empty, watch a rerun of a soccer match from 1979. PS: For those people who believe this head of the Italian Institute is lying with his facts and figures, stop and think it through. He’s going to announce such devastating news that essentially contradicts everything the Italian government is doing with its lockdowns and quarantines of the whole country? It would be as if the director of the Centers for Disease Control announced, “There are a total of nine deaths in the US we think might have been caused by COV, and even there we’re not sure, because you see, these nine were elderly people who could barely get out of bed long before COV emerged. These nine had extremely serious lung disease NOT CAUSED, I repeat, NOT CAUSED by COV…but anyway, don’t go outside, work from home, don’t touch another human being, watch our website for bargain deals on toilet paper, and oh yes, don’t forget to get your regular flu shot if you can slip into a hazmat suit and drive at breakneck speed to your nearest pharmacy, where injection clerks are waiting…”
O
Amplification and quantification of DNA.
See also: Use of DNA in forensic entomology.
Because PCR amplifies the regions of DNA that it targets, PCR can be used to analyze extremely small amounts of sample. This is often critical for forensic analysis, when only a trace amount of DNA is available as evidence. PCR may also be used in the analysis of ancient DNA that is tens of thousands of years old. These PCR-based techniques have been successfully used on animals, such as a forty-thousand-year-old mammoth, and also on human DNA, in applications ranging from the analysis of Egyptian mummies to the identification of a Russian tsar and the body of English king Richard III.
Quantitative PCR or Real Time PCR (qPCR, not to be confused with RT-PCR) methods allow the estimation of the amount of a given sequence present in a sample—a technique often applied to quantitatively determine levels of gene expression. Quantitative PCR is an established tool for DNA quantification that measures the accumulation of DNA product after each round of PCR amplification. qPCR allows the quantification and detection of a specific DNA sequence in real time since it measures concentration , while the synthesis process is taking place. There are two methods for simultaneous detection and quantification. The first method consists of using fluorescent dyes that are retained nonspecifically in between the double strands. The second method involves probes , that code for specific sequences and are fluorescently labeled. Detection of DNA using these methods can only be seen after the hybridization of probes with its complementary DNA takes place. An interesting technique combination is real-time PCR and reverse transcription. This sophisticated technique, called RT-qPCR, allows for the quantification of a small quantity of RNA. Through this combined technique, mRNA is converted to cDNA, which is further quantified using qPCR. This technique lowers the possibility of error at the end point of PCR, increasing chances??? for detection of genes associated with genetic diseases such as cancer. Laboratories use RT-qPCR for the purpose of sensitively measuring gene regulation.
Medical and diagnostic applications
Prospective parents can be tested for being genetic carriers, or their children might be tested for actually being affected by a disease.????? DNA samples for prenatal testing can be obtained by amniocentesis, chorionic villus sampling, or even by the analysis of rare fetal cells circulating in the mother's bloodstream. PCR analysis is also essential to preimplantation genetic diagnosis, where individual cells of a developing embryo are tested for mutations. PCR can also be used as part of a sensitive test for tissue typing, vital to organ transplantation.??? As of 2008, there is even a proposal to replace the traditional antibody-based tests for blood type , with PCR-based tests. Many forms of cancer involve alterations to oncogenes??. By using PCR-based tests to study these mutations, therapy regimens can sometimes be individually customized??? to a patient. PCR permits??? early diagnosis of malignant diseases such as leukemia and lymphomas, which is currently the highest-developed??? in cancer research and is already being used routinely. PCR assays can be performed directly on genomic DNA samples to detect translocation-specific malignant cells at a sensitivity that is at least 10,000 fold higher than that of other methods. PCR is very useful??? in the medical field since it allows for the isolation??? and amplification of tumor suppressors. Quantitative PCR for example, can be used to quantify and analyze single cells, as well as recognize DNA, mRNA and protein confirmations and combinations.
Infectious disease applications
PCR allows for rapid and highly specific diagnosis of infectious diseases, including those caused by bacteria or viruses. PCR also permits identification of non-cultivatable or slow-growing microorganisms such as mycobacteria, anaerobic bacteria, or viruses from tissue culture assays and animal models. The basis for PCR diagnostic applications in microbiology is the detection of infectious agents and the discrimination of non-pathogenic from pathogenic strains by virtue of specific genes. Characterization and detection of infectious disease organisms have been revolutionized?? by PCR in the following ways:
The human immunodeficiency virus (or HIV), is a difficult target to find and eradicate. The earliest tests for infection , relied on the presence of antibodies to the virus circulating in the bloodstream. However, antibodies don't appear until many weeks after infection , maternal antibodies mask the infection of a newborn, and therapeutic agents to fight the infection don't affect the antibodies. PCR tests have been developed that can detect as little as one viral genome among the DNA of over 50,000 host cells. Infections can be detected earlier, donated blood can be screened directly for the virus, newborns can be immediately tested for infection, and the effects of antiviral treatments can be quantified. Some disease organisms, such as that for tuberculosis, are difficult to sample from patients and slow to be grown in the laboratory.
PCR-based tests have allowed detection of small numbers of disease organisms (both live or dead), in convenient samples. Detailed genetic analysis can also be used to detect antibiotic resistance, allowing immediate and effective therapy. The effects of therapy can also be immediately evaluated. The spread of a disease organism through populations of domestic or wild animals can be monitored by PCR testing. In many cases, the appearance of new virulent sub-types can be detected and monitored. The sub-types of an organism that were responsible for earlier epidemics can also be determined by PCR analysis.
Viral DNA can be detected by PCR. The primers used must be specific to the targeted sequences in the DNA of a virus, and PCR can be used for diagnostic analyses or DNA sequencing of the viral genome. The high sensitivity of PCR permits virus detection , soon after infection and even before the onset of disease. Such early detection may give physicians a significant lead time in treatment. The amount of virus("viral load") in a patient can also be quantified by PCR-based DNA quantitation techniques. Diseases such as pertussis (or whooping cough) are cause by the bacteria Bordetella pertussis. This bacteria is marked by a serious acute respiratory infection that affects various animals and humans and has led to the deaths of many young children. The pertussis toxin is a protein exotoxin that binds to cell receptors by two dimers and reacts with different cell types such as T lymphocytes which plays a role in cell immunity. PCR is an important testing tool that can detect the sequences that are within the pertussis toxin gene. This is because PCR has a high sensitivity for the toxin and has demonstrated a rapid turnaround time. PCR is very efficient??? for diagnosing pertussis when compared to culture.
Here’s what the CDC says about the test for the Coronavirus ..Straight from the horse’s mouth—both sides by Jon Rappoport March 24, 2020
The CDC (US Centers for Disease Control) admits the coronavirus test is flawed. That’s the overview and the takeaway— As my readers know, I’ve described why the widespread diagnostic test for the coronavirus is insufficient, misleading, useless, and deceptive. That test, used all over the world where it is available, is called the PCR. It diagnoses patients. “Yes, you have the virus.” “No you don’t.” A very alert reader sent me a link to a US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) document about the test. The CDC establishes the guidelines for how the test should be done, and what the results mean. Here is a CDC paragraph about results. I suggest you read it several times. “Positive [test] results are indicative of active infection with 2019-nCoV but do not rule out bacterial infection or co-infection with other viruses. The agent detected may not be the definite cause of disease. Laboratories within the United States and its territories are required to report all positive results to the appropriate public health authorities.”
The CDC (US Centers for Disease Control) admits the coronavirus test is flawed. That’s the overview and the takeaway— As my readers know, I’ve described why the widespread diagnostic test for the coronavirus is insufficient, misleading, useless, and deceptive. That test, used all over the world where it is available, is called the PCR. It diagnoses patients. “Yes, you have the virus.” “No you don’t.” A very alert reader sent me a link to a US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) document about the test. The CDC establishes the guidelines for how the test should be done, and what the results mean. Here is a CDC paragraph about results. I suggest you read it several times. “Positive [test] results are indicative of active infection with 2019-nCoV but do not rule out bacterial infection or co-infection with other viruses. The agent detected may not be the definite cause of disease. Laboratories within the United States and its territories are required to report all positive results to the appropriate public health authorities.”
I’m going to blow past the blatant contradiction in that CDC paragraph and cut to the chase. The key line in that paragraph is: “The agent detected [the coronavirus] may not be the definite cause of disease.”. CDC: Yeah, you see, folks, ahem, the test could say the coronavirus is there in somebody’s body, but the virus may not be causing disease… On one level, the CDC is admitting the test could turn up false positives: the test could SAY a patient has the coronavirus, but he really doesn’t. This isn’t a footnote stuck at the bottom of a report. It’s right there near the top of the section about the meaning of the test.
CDC is saying straight out, IF THE TEST SHOWS A CORONAVIRUS IS PRESENT, THAT DOESN’T MEAN IT’S CAUSING DISEASE.
Well, yes, I’ve pointed out that the test has an inherent problem. At best, it might show that a virus is present in the patient’s body. But the test is incapable of determining HOW MUCH virus is ACTIVELY REPLICATING in the patient’s body. And why is that important? Because, to even begin to say a virus is causing actual illness in a human, there would have to be millions and millions of a virus replicating in his body—and the PCR test has never been proven, in the real world, to be able to make such a judgment call accurately. But, if you read that CDC quote again, you’ll see the CDC is ordering labs to report a positive test result to public health agencies—where it will be counted as a “coronavirus case”. Thank you, CDC. So very, very much.
Coronavirus: toxic drugs, no liability for Pharma by Jon Rappoport March 22, 2020
First, we have this, from the World Health Organization (WHO): “There is no specific medicine to prevent or treat coronavirus disease (COVID-19).” Nevertheless, doctors around the world, often with the approval of their national governments, are treating many patients with experimental or “off-label” antiviral drugs. Here are some names of the medicines: Chloroquine, Remdesivir, Ribavirin, favipiravir, lopinavir; ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, Sofosbuvir, corticosteroids, oseltamivir, zanamivir. They all have adverse effects. What to do? Answer: decide that no one who is injured by the drugs can file a suit. In America: Done. From druganddevicelawblog.com, March 18, 2020, “We Finally Have Something To Say About COVID-19”: “On March 17, 2020, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) published in the Federal Register a ‘notice of declaration’ conferring broad-based immunity from tort (including product liability) litigation for those engaging in ‘activities related to medical countermeasures against COVID-19.’ This declaration is now published at 85 Fed. Reg. 15198 (HHS March 17, 2020).” “HHS is conferring tort immunity…The immunity extends to ‘any claim of loss , caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the manufacture, distribution, administration, or use of medical countermeasures’ The immunity extends not only to COVID-19-fighting drugs, but also to ‘products or technologies intended to enhance the use or effect of a drug, biological product [vaccine], or device used against the pandemic’…The only exception is for ‘willful misconduct’.” “The immunity being conferred shoves other federal laws aside as well as preempting state law.”
And that takes care of that. A patient is given an antiviral drug and dies? No law suit can be filed. Anyone associated with the drug, from manufacturer down to prescribing doctor, is exempt from liability. Take one example of a drug, Chloroquine. It’s approved for the treatment of malaria, and now some doctors are using it on their COVID patients. From webmd.com, here is the “side effects” section (note: once the page loads, then click on the “Side Effects” tab at the top of the page): * “Blurred vision, nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps, headache, and diarrhea may occur. If any of these effects persist or worsen, tell your doctor or pharmacist promptly.” * “Remember that your doctor has prescribed this medication because he or she has judged that the benefit to you is greater than the risk of side effects. Many people using this medication do not have serious side effects.” * “Tell your doctor right away if you have any serious side effects, including: bleaching of hair color, hair loss, mental/mood changes (such as confusion, personality changes, unusual thoughts/behavior, depression), hearing changes (such as ringing in the ears, hearing loss), darkening of skin/tissue inside the mouth, worsening of skin conditions (such as dermatitis, psoriasis), signs of serious infection (such as high fever, severe chills, persistent sore throat), unusual tiredness, swelling legs/ankles, shortness of breath, pale lips/nails/skin, signs of liver disease (such as severe stomach/abdominal pain, yellowing eyes/skin, dark urine), easy bruising/bleeding, muscle weakness, unwanted/uncontrolled movements (including tongue and face twitching).” * “This medication may rarely cause low blood sugar (hypoglycemia). Tell your doctor right away if you develop symptoms of low blood sugar, such as sudden sweating, shaking, hunger, blurred vision, dizziness, or tingling hands/feet. If you have diabetes, be sure to check your blood sugars regularly. Your doctor may need to adjust your diabetes medication.” * “Get medical help right away if you have any very serious side effects, including: severe dizziness, fainting, fast/slow/irregular heartbeat, seizures.” * “This medication may cause serious eye/vision problems. The risk for these side effects is increased with long-term use of this medication (over weeks to years) and with taking this medication in high doses. Get medical help right away if you have any symptoms of serious eye problems, including: severe vision changes (such as light flashes/streaks, difficulty reading, complete blindness).” * “A very serious allergic reaction to this drug is rare. However, get medical help right away if you notice any symptoms of a serious allergic reaction, including: rash, itching/swelling (especially of the face/tongue/throat), severe dizziness, trouble breathing.” * “This is not a complete list of possible side effects. If you notice other effects not listed above, contact your doctor or pharmacist.”
No liability. No law suits. No problem. Except for the patient.
First, we have this, from the World Health Organization (WHO): “There is no specific medicine to prevent or treat coronavirus disease (COVID-19).” Nevertheless, doctors around the world, often with the approval of their national governments, are treating many patients with experimental or “off-label” antiviral drugs. Here are some names of the medicines: Chloroquine, Remdesivir, Ribavirin, favipiravir, lopinavir; ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, Sofosbuvir, corticosteroids, oseltamivir, zanamivir. They all have adverse effects. What to do? Answer: decide that no one who is injured by the drugs can file a suit. In America: Done. From druganddevicelawblog.com, March 18, 2020, “We Finally Have Something To Say About COVID-19”: “On March 17, 2020, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) published in the Federal Register a ‘notice of declaration’ conferring broad-based immunity from tort (including product liability) litigation for those engaging in ‘activities related to medical countermeasures against COVID-19.’ This declaration is now published at 85 Fed. Reg. 15198 (HHS March 17, 2020).” “HHS is conferring tort immunity…The immunity extends to ‘any claim of loss , caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the manufacture, distribution, administration, or use of medical countermeasures’ The immunity extends not only to COVID-19-fighting drugs, but also to ‘products or technologies intended to enhance the use or effect of a drug, biological product [vaccine], or device used against the pandemic’…The only exception is for ‘willful misconduct’.” “The immunity being conferred shoves other federal laws aside as well as preempting state law.”
And that takes care of that. A patient is given an antiviral drug and dies? No law suit can be filed. Anyone associated with the drug, from manufacturer down to prescribing doctor, is exempt from liability. Take one example of a drug, Chloroquine. It’s approved for the treatment of malaria, and now some doctors are using it on their COVID patients. From webmd.com, here is the “side effects” section (note: once the page loads, then click on the “Side Effects” tab at the top of the page): * “Blurred vision, nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps, headache, and diarrhea may occur. If any of these effects persist or worsen, tell your doctor or pharmacist promptly.” * “Remember that your doctor has prescribed this medication because he or she has judged that the benefit to you is greater than the risk of side effects. Many people using this medication do not have serious side effects.” * “Tell your doctor right away if you have any serious side effects, including: bleaching of hair color, hair loss, mental/mood changes (such as confusion, personality changes, unusual thoughts/behavior, depression), hearing changes (such as ringing in the ears, hearing loss), darkening of skin/tissue inside the mouth, worsening of skin conditions (such as dermatitis, psoriasis), signs of serious infection (such as high fever, severe chills, persistent sore throat), unusual tiredness, swelling legs/ankles, shortness of breath, pale lips/nails/skin, signs of liver disease (such as severe stomach/abdominal pain, yellowing eyes/skin, dark urine), easy bruising/bleeding, muscle weakness, unwanted/uncontrolled movements (including tongue and face twitching).” * “This medication may rarely cause low blood sugar (hypoglycemia). Tell your doctor right away if you develop symptoms of low blood sugar, such as sudden sweating, shaking, hunger, blurred vision, dizziness, or tingling hands/feet. If you have diabetes, be sure to check your blood sugars regularly. Your doctor may need to adjust your diabetes medication.” * “Get medical help right away if you have any very serious side effects, including: severe dizziness, fainting, fast/slow/irregular heartbeat, seizures.” * “This medication may cause serious eye/vision problems. The risk for these side effects is increased with long-term use of this medication (over weeks to years) and with taking this medication in high doses. Get medical help right away if you have any symptoms of serious eye problems, including: severe vision changes (such as light flashes/streaks, difficulty reading, complete blindness).” * “A very serious allergic reaction to this drug is rare. However, get medical help right away if you notice any symptoms of a serious allergic reaction, including: rash, itching/swelling (especially of the face/tongue/throat), severe dizziness, trouble breathing.” * “This is not a complete list of possible side effects. If you notice other effects not listed above, contact your doctor or pharmacist.”
No liability. No law suits. No problem. Except for the patient.
The concept of “herd immunity” first materialized in the 1930s, when Johns Hopkins University’s Arthur Hedrich discovered that, after 55% of Baltimore’s population acquired measles (and thus immunity to measles), the rest of the population, or “herd,” became protected. JOHNS HOPKINS = founded by SKULL & BONES . This concept provides today’s rationale for insisting that everyone be vaccinated. // Herd immunity sounds fine in theory. But as Stanford’s Dr. Obukhanych concluded, “As with any garbage in-garbage out type of theory, the expectations of the herd-immunity theory are bound to fail in the real world.” https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/junk-science-week-vaccinating-the-herd She begins by defining the term, and orienting us to the fact that “herd immunity” is not a scientifically validated concept, let alone one that applies definitively, predictably, or preventatively to vaccinated communities: Herd immunity is not an immunologic idea, but rather an epidemiologic construct, which theoretically predicts successful disease control when a certain pre-calculated percentage of people in the population are immune from disease.
https://kellybroganmd.com/herd-immunity-fact-fiction/
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/herd-immunity-a-false-rationale-for-vaccine-mandates/ https://www.wakeupuk.net/why-herd-immunity-is-a-hoax/
www.imusenvironmentalhealth.org/why-herd-immunity-is-a-hoax/
https://science.news/2018-01-30-flu-vaccine-bombshell-630-more-aerosolized-flu-virus-particles-emitted-by-people-who-received-flu-shots-flu-vaccines-actually-spread-the-flu.html
https://kellybroganmd.com/herd-immunity-fact-fiction/
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/herd-immunity-a-false-rationale-for-vaccine-mandates/ https://www.wakeupuk.net/why-herd-immunity-is-a-hoax/
www.imusenvironmentalhealth.org/why-herd-immunity-is-a-hoax/
https://science.news/2018-01-30-flu-vaccine-bombshell-630-more-aerosolized-flu-virus-particles-emitted-by-people-who-received-flu-shots-flu-vaccines-actually-spread-the-flu.html
Rikke My.. to FILM YOUR HOSPITAL
Hello from Denmark!
Our hospitals are also empty - just not according to the news .
Our Corona deaths are counted, including all deaths - even heart attacks and traffic accidents - if they have been tested positive within 60 days before their death.
Our country is in lockdown.
Our government is overruling 200 years old laws - even the constitusion.
We officially have no freedom of speech, since you can now get up to 8 months in prison, for writing against the government’s recommendations.
Our economy is FUCKED!
They have already said that nothing is going to be the same again.
Hello from Denmark!
Our hospitals are also empty - just not according to the news .
Our Corona deaths are counted, including all deaths - even heart attacks and traffic accidents - if they have been tested positive within 60 days before their death.
Our country is in lockdown.
Our government is overruling 200 years old laws - even the constitusion.
We officially have no freedom of speech, since you can now get up to 8 months in prison, for writing against the government’s recommendations.
Our economy is FUCKED!
They have already said that nothing is going to be the same again.
Mikey Deuce.. Same situation here in Norway // Mikey Deuce …Brian Porter ..in Sweden everything is open haha. Malls, gyms, schools etc. They are taking a different approach // Mikey Deuce.. My friends girlfriend works at the largest hospital in my city. Media claims its packed. She says its quiet // Brian Porter ..Sweden is the "control" in this worldwide experiment i guess // Kay Richards-Stapley ..Brian Porter.. The numbers are for fear mongering only.. // Marie E. Lockwood ..Mikey Deuce ..They are already cashless and chipped in Sweden. // Mikey Deuce.. Marie E. Lockwood ..only a small group who wanted it themselves. Its in no way mandatory at this point // Marie E. Lockwood ..Yes the chips were voluntary but the society is mostly cashless. Even most of their banks no longer do any cash transactions. // John Thomas… Milhorat Rikke , I am from New York and everything you described is going on here as well. We are all in the same boat it seems. Hang in there my friend. As long as more people begin to realize what is really going on and how we have been all brutally lied to all over this Earth , there is a chance to stop this madness. At least, I like to think so. //
Facebook URL
Embedded content from facebook.com can't be previewed in the editor.
There is NOTHING called VIRUS . medically relevant / pathogenic.
Even in the latest version coronavirus , strange to be a single word - it means something else , they are not identifying the so called virus itself , but something THEY CALL ncov-2019 RNA.
study the protocols / processes involved in PCR whatever version , RT or Q RT . its worse than assumptions and presumptions , recklessness , conspiracies , very crude but given complex sounding names purely to deceive.
Virus is Political.
final declaration involves INTERPRETATION . and DEFINITION can create sickness / pandemic .
PCR is the MOST SENSITIVE / POPULAR -- it does NOT mean accurate / precise. without a precise PCR or whatever , without isolating a purified virus , how do they come up with ANTIBODY tests? many will be SACRIFICED. how PCR became most popular . they made it popular .
PCR is the MOST SENSITIVE / POPULAR -- it does NOT mean accurate / precise. without a precise PCR or whatever , without isolating a purified virus , how do they come up with ANTIBODY tests? many will be SACRIFICED. how PCR became most popular . they made it popular .
Regarding the current coronavirus pandemic, they said: "If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%."
New WUHAN study shows deaths to be between 0.04 to 0.12% This is 33 times lower than the media headlines.
-- WE SEE TOO MANY 33 EVERYWHERE RE covid19 … google --- 33 coronavirus
-- WE SEE TOO MANY 33 EVERYWHERE RE covid19 … google --- 33 coronavirus
Dr. Fauci is also the head Director at the National Institutes of Health for the Gates foundation. Fauci is pushing the whole country to hurry and get the vaccines when they are out. We also see where the COVID-19 vaccine is heading. They are using fear tactics off the deaths to mandate it.
Bill Gates Calls For National Tracking System For Coronavirus During Reddit AMA https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2020/03/18/bill-gates-calls-for-national-tracking-system-for-coronavirus-during-reddit-ama/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/simonchandler/2020/03/23/coronavirus-could-infect-privacy-and-civil-liberties-foreverhttps://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2002387https://annals.org/aim/article-abstract/2762506/effect-influenza-vaccination-elderly-hospitalization-mortality-observational-study-regression-discontinuityhttps://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.12.20022434v2
Media's hysteria and the politicians' rhetoric is going pandemic.
German immunologist and toxicologist, Professor Stefan Hockertz, explains in a radio interview that Covid19 is no more dangerous than influenza (the flu). More dangerous than the virus is the fear and panic created by the media and the „authoritarian reaction“ of many governments.
Professor Hockertz also notes that most so-called „corona deaths“ have in fact died of other causes while also testing positive for coronaviruses.
SYMPTOMS MEAN NOTHING ANYMORE. THE SCIENCE ESTABLISHMENT WILL DECIDE , WHO HAS WHAT , WHETHER HE SHOULD BE CULLED OR QUARANTINED .
The Argentinean virologist and biochemist Pablo Goldschmidt speaks of a „global terror“ created by the media and politics. Every year, he says, three million newborns worldwide and 50,000 adults in the US alone die of pneumonia.
Professor Julian Nida-Ruemelin, former German Minister of State for Culture and Professor of Ethics, points out that Covid19 poses no risk to the healthy general population and that extreme measures such as curfews are therefore not justified.
Using data from the cruise ship Diamond Princess, .. the age-corrected lethality of Covid19 is between 0.025% and 0.625%, i.e. in the range of a strong cold or the flu.
Moreover, a Japanese study showed that of all the test-positive passengers, and despite the high average age, 48% remained completely symptom-free; even among the 80-89 year olds , 48% remained symptom-free, while among the 70 to 79 year olds it was an astounding 60% that developed no symptoms at all.
The Italian example has shown that 99% of test-positive deaths had one or more pre-existing conditions, and even among these, only 12% of the death certificates mentioned Covid19 as a causal factor.
“Coronavirus is a virus with public relations”
— Prof. Yoram Lass, MD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZcLqcoL49M
— Prof. Yoram Lass, MD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZcLqcoL49M
http://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/
This event was in October, 2019. The first reporting of unidentified COVID19 cases to the WHO was Dec 31, 2019. The event included saying they would have to control “dissent” on social media, and facebook “factcheckers” have been out in force. And the event predicted the stock market fall. And the event predicted an 18 month quarantine time frame. All that we see today. And the event sponsors, Johns Hopkins/Bloomberg and Gates are all over this crisis in the media.
The ID2020 Alliance has launched a new digital identity program at its annual summit in New York, in collaboration with the Government of Bangladesh, vaccine alliance Gavi, and new partners in government, academia, and humanitarian relief.
The program to leverage immunization as an opportunity to establish digital identity was unveiled by ID2020 in partnership with the Bangladesh Government’s Access to Information (a2i) Program, the Directorate General of Health Services, and Gavi, according to the announcement.Digital identity is a computerized record of who a person is, stored in a registry. It is used, in this case, to keep track of who has received vaccination
This is part of Agenda ID2020 – and these steps to be implemented now – prepared since long, including by the coronavirus COMPUTER SIMULATION at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore on 18 October 2019, sponsored by the WEF and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. .. Bill Gates, one of the chief advocates of vaccinations for everybody, especially in Africa – is also a huge advocate of population reduction. . Population reduction is among the goals of the elite within the WEF, the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Morgans – and others… This had openly been propagated already in the 1960s and 70s by Henry Kissinger, Foreign Secretary in the Nixon Administration .. GAVI, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, identifies itself on its website as a global health partnership of public and private sector organizations dedicated to “immunization for all”. GAVI is supported by WHO, and needless to say, its main partners and sponsors are the pharma-industry. The ID2020 Alliance at their 2019 Summit, entitled “Rising to the Good ID Challenge”, in September 2019 in New York, decided to roll out their program in 2020, a decision confirmed by the WEF in January 2020 in Davos.
GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, and “partners from academia and humanitarian relief” (as they call it), are part of the pioneer party. Is it just a coincidence that ID2020 is being rolled out at the onset of what WHO calls a Pandemic? – Or is a pandemic needed to ‘roll out’ the multiple devastating programs of ID2020?
GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, and “partners from academia and humanitarian relief” (as they call it), are part of the pioneer party. Is it just a coincidence that ID2020 is being rolled out at the onset of what WHO calls a Pandemic? – Or is a pandemic needed to ‘roll out’ the multiple devastating programs of ID2020?
https://www.biometricupdate.com/201909/id2020-and-partners-launch-program-to-provide-digital-id-with-vaccines
THANKS AND REGARDS JASON HOMMEL, FRANCIS JOSEPH
No comments:
Post a Comment