What is The Difference? So much Controversy and Unknowns

 Between this and the other hundreds of mutations that occur with viruses? Why is this one ‘special’?

Health Ministry: COVID-19 mutation gaining steam

Seven new cases of the new mutation were discovered in Jerusalem, Bnei Brak, and Givat Ze'ev, 300 specimens sent for sequencing

[…] The Ministry of Health has sent over three hundred possible specimens of this mutation for genetic sequencing, as part of the nationwide sequencing plan established by the Ministry.

_______________________________

Polymerase chain reaction, or PCR, is a technique to make many copies of a ... For instance, DNA amplified by PCR may be sent for sequencing, visualized by ... For instance, PCR is used to amplify genes associated with genetic disorders ... PCR can also be used to test for a bacterium or DNA virus in a patient's body: if …  

Key points:

• Polymerase chain reaction, or PCR, is a technique to make many copies of a specific DNA region in vitro (in a test tube rather than an organism).
• PCR relies on a thermostable DNA polymerase, Taq polymerase, and requires DNA primers designed specifically for the DNA region of interest.
• In PCR, the reaction is repeatedly cycled through a series of temperature changes, which allow many copies of the target region to be produced.
• PCR has many research and practical applications. It is routinely used in DNA cloning, medical diagnostics, and forensic analysis of DNA.

Using PCR, a DNA sequence can be amplified millions or billions of times, producing enough DNA copies to be analyzed using other techniques. 

https://www.khanacademy.org/science/ap-biology/gene-expression-and-regulation/biotechnology/a/polymerase-chain-reaction-pcr

_________________________

ALSO OF INTEREST

NEW STRAIN: 70% MORE TRANSMISSIBLE

[…] it was announced that a spike in coronavirus cases in Britain was caused by an outbreak of a new mutated strain of the virus labeled N501Y by scientists. This development is raising concerns about the efficacy of the recently released vaccine. A mutation means a change in the genetic sequence of the SARS-CoV-2, which is an RNA virus. Experts are reassuring the public that the vaccine will be effective as there have already been over 4,000 mutations detected in the coronavirus since the pandemic began while noting that a single mutation does not render the vaccine ineffective.  The British mutation initially appeared in Brazil in April before crossing the Atlantic Ocean, though it appears to have become up to 70% more transmissible but not more deadly or resistant to vaccines, since leaving South America. The same mutation has also been detected in the Netherlands, Denmark, and Australia. Several countries to put a travel ban in place, restricting arrivals of travelers and, in some cases, products from Britain. (from israel365news.com)

Nir Ben Artzi: “The Creator of the world loves Israel,” Rabbi Ben Artzi began. “He brought the plague of the corona by the ‘king’s road’ (the high road, the fast way). God is pleading with the Jews who live outside of Israel to come to Israel. Outside of Israel is a killer that will not stop killing. The corona is running rampant in the world. The corona has made the world into a huge bowl of spaghetti.”

Is this the DNA change envisioned by the Technocrats? 

Nir ben Artzi says something very interesting. “There is the plague epidemic but very soon there will be an epidemic of a different sort. This is because God wants to change mankind into a different kind.” [now, this would play into the assertion about the vaccine being able to change one’s DNA (eventually?)] (from israel365news.com)

__________________

ALSO Someone sent this to me, and it is currently being examined for “authenticity and possibility” and being presented here with my comments:

“Then the inhabitants of the cities of Yisrael will go out and make fires and feed them with the weapons—shields and bucklers, bows and arrows, hand-held sticks and spears; they shall use them as fuel for seven years. (Ezekiel 39:9)”

[ME: Chabad:  "9  Then the inhabitants of the cities of Israel will go forth and make fires and heat up with the weapons, the bucklers, and the encompassing shields, the bows and the arrows and the handstaves and the spears, and burn them as fires for seven years.]

[…] “the Metzudat David, elaborates on the “sticks” saying that they are actually a long, thin rod and at the head of it is a type of steel needle used to kill people with an injection.” 

[ME:  ACTUALLY THE METZUDAS DOVID SAYS … "specially designed spear that's thrown at its target”. So while it may fit a certain narrative for some, it is not the Metzudat David.]

[However this may be very true:]  “Many in Israel are now connecting that commentary to the highly controversial corona vaccine saying that the covid shot is a weapon being in the final war as we speak.” (from israel365news.com)

ALSO AS ORIGINALLY POSTED BY TOMERDEVORAH:

Pay attention to how the vaccine is being described, toward the last part of the video:

Harav Yuval Asherov - Corona Vaccine - Did you Know?

Former Pfizer Chief Science Officer and False-Positive CV Testing

"Pandemic is Over" - Former Pfizer Chief Science Officer Says "Second Wave" Faked On False-Positive COVID Tests https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/pandemic-over-former-pfizer-chief-science-officer-says-second-wave-faked-false-positive

[most pertinent extrapolated portions, with charts]

Dr. Michael Yeadon is an Allergy & Respiratory Therapeutic Area expert with 23 years in the pharmaceutical industry. He trained as a biochemist and pharmacologist, obtaining his PhD from the University of Surrey (UK) in 1988.

Dr. Yeadon then worked at the Wellcome Research Labs with Salvador Moncada with a research focus on airway hyper-responsiveness and effects of pollutants including ozone and working in drug discovery of 5-LO, COX, PAF, NO and lung inflammation. With colleagues, he was the first to detect exhaled NO in animals and later to induce NOS in lung via allergic triggers.

Joining Pfizer in 1995, he was responsible for the growth and portfolio delivery of the Allergy & Respiratory pipeline within the company. He was responsible for target selection and the progress into humans of new molecules, leading teams of up to 200 staff across all disciplines and won an Achievement Award for productivity in 2008.

Under his leadership the research unit invented oral and inhaled NCEs which delivered multiple positive clinical proofs of concept in asthma, allergic rhinitis and COPD. He led productive collaborations such as with Rigel Pharmaceuticals (SYK inhibitors) and was involved in the licensing of Spiriva and acquisition of the Meridica (inhaler device) company.

Dr. Yeadon has published over 40 original research articles and now consults and partners with a number of biotechnology companies. Before working with Apellis, Dr. Yeadon was VP and Chief Scientific Officer (Allergy & Respiratory Research) with Pfizer.

Chief Science Officer for the pharmaceutical giant Pfizer says "there is no science to suggest a second wave should happen." The "Big Pharma" insider asserts that false positive results from inherently unreliable COVID tests are being used to manufacture a "second wave" based on "new cases.”

[…]

Yeadon said in the interview:

"Were it not for the test data that you get from the TV all the time, you would rightly conclude that the pandemic was over, as nothing much has happened. Of course people go to the hospital, moving into the autumn flu season...but there is no science to suggest a second wave should happen."

In a paper published this month, which was co-authored by Yeadon and two of his colleagues, "How Likely is a Second Wave?", the scientists write:

"It has widely been observed that in all heavily infected countries in Europe and several of the US states likewise, that the shape of the daily deaths vs. time curves is similar to ours in the UK. Many of these curves are not just similar, but almost super imposable."

In the data for UK, Sweden, the US, and the world, it can be seen that in all cases, deaths were on the rise in March through mid or late April, then began tapering off in a smooth slope which flattened around the end of June and continues to today. The case rates however, based on testing, rise and swing upwards and downwards wildly.

Media messaging in the US is already ramping up expectations of a "second wave."

The survival rate of COVID-19 has been upgraded since May to 99.8% of infections. This comes close to ordinary flu, the survival rate of which is 99.9%. Although COVID can have serious after-effects, so can flu or any respiratory illness. The present survival rate is far higher than initial grim guesses in March and April, cited by Dr. Anthony Fauci, of 94%, or 20 to 30 times deadlier. The Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) value accepted by Yeadon et al in the paper is .26%. The survival rate of a disease is 100% minus the IFR.

[…]

Yeadon's warnings are confirmed by a new study from the Infectious Diseases Society of America., summarized succinctly in the following twitter thread from al gato malo (@boriquagato)

Anyone still presuming that a Positive PCR test is showing a COVID case needs to read this very carefully:

• even 25 cycles of amplification, 70% of "positives" are not "cases." virus cannot be cultured. it's dead.
• by 35: 97% non-clinical.
• the US runs at 40, 32X the amplification of 35.

a lot of people still seem to not understand what this means, so let's lay that out for a minute.

PCR tests look for RNA. there is too little in your swab. so they amplify it using a primer based heating and annealing process.

Each cycle of this process doubles the material

the US (and much of the world) is using a 40 Ct (cycle threshold). so, 40 doublings, 1 trillion X amplification.

This is absurdly high.

The way that we know this is by running this test, seeing the Ct to find the RNA, and then using the same sample to try to culture virus.

If you cannot culture the virus, then the virus is "dead." it's inert. if it cannot replicate, it cannot infect you or others. it's just traces of virus, remnants, fragments etc

PCR is not testing for disease, it's testing for a specific RNA pattern and this is the key pivot 

When you crank it up to 25, 70% of the positive results are not really "positives" in any clinical sense.

i hesitate to call it a "false positive" because it's really not. it did find RNA.

but that RNA is not clinically relevant.

It cannot make you or anyone else sick

so let's call this a non-clinical positive (NCP).

• if 70% of positives are NCP's at 25, imagine what 40 looks like. 35 is 1000X as sensitive.
• this study found only 3% live at 35
• 40 Ct is 32X 35, 32,000X 25

no one can culture live virus past about 34 and we have known this since march. yet no one has adjusted these tests.

[…]

This is more very strong data refuting the idea that you can trust a PCR+ as a clinical indicator.

That is NOT what it's meant for. at all.

[…] 

The FDA would never do it, the drug companies doing vaccine trials would never do it... it's because it's nonsense.

And this same test is used for "hospitalizations" and "death with covid" (itself a weirdly over inclusive metric)

PCR testing is not the answer, it's the problem.

It's not how to get control of an epidemic, it's how to completely lose control of your data picture and wind up with gibberish and we have done this to ourselves before.

[…]

We're basing policy that is affecting billions of humans on data that is uninterpretable gibberish.

It's a deranged technocrat's wet dream, but for those of us along for the ride, it's a nightmare.

Testing is not the solution, it's the problem.

[…]

IDSA Doc.

ANOTHER BOMBSHELL

 Before taken down:

HOW TO CREATE A PANDEMIC:

THEY ARE USING 40 CYCLES TO CREATE A POSITIVE

IF 60 CYCLES = POSITIVE FOR EVERYONE

As we approach the one year anniversary of the novel coronavirus outbreak, we find ourselves facing many unanswered questions. We find ourselves worse off in many ways, in comparison to when the outbreak just began, as we receive signals from public health officials and the media to prepare for another lockdown. It appears we are approaching what could to be a perfect storm. The US Presidential Elections, flu season, the arrival of the new experimental COVID vaccine and the prophesied ‘second wave’ of COVID. The big news of the week of course, has been President Trump and the First Lady have both tested positive for COVID. The President has been hospitalized. President Trump’s doctor, said that Trump’s diagnosis was confirmed using the PCR test. Just like virtually every other ‘confirmed case’ we hear reported. But was PCR really developed with the intention of diagnosing infectious diseases? Is PCR capable of diagnosing infectious diseases? How could a test developed almost 40 years ago be used to diagnose a brand new disease found less than one year ago? In this report, we examine this questions in addition to reviewing video clips of multiple doctors weighing in on the subject including the biochemist Kary Mullis who invented PCR and won a Nobel Prize in Chemistry for doing so has to say. Why is understanding the test so important? Because it is the driving factor in the fear campaign, that is being driven by the corrupt media and then used by the government to justify the restrictions imposed on our lives. This is a must see report that may change the perception of you, or of someone you may know, regarding the crisis. Links Coronavirus Testing Suspended at Boston Lab Due to Nearly 400 False Positives https://www.activistpost.com/2020/09/... "Dead" Virus Cells Frequently Trigger "False Positives" In Most Common COVID Test, New Study Finds https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitica... Tanzania coronavirus kits raise suspicion after goat and pawpaw test positive https://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo... COVID Test Nasal Swab Punctured Woman’s Brain Lining and Caused Brain Fluid to Leak from Her Nose https://www.activistpost.com/2020/10/... Michigan Supreme Court: Governor exceeded powers during coronavirus pandemic https://www.wlns.com/top-stories/mich... Federal judge rules Pennsylvania's coronavirus orders are unconstitutional https://thehill.com/regulation/court-... Was the COVID-19 Test Meant to Detect a Virus? https://uncoverdc.com/2020/04/07/was-... Kary Mullis, Inventor of the PCR Technique, Dies https://www.the-scientist.com/news-op...

Take a look at this:  https://www.mojo.vision

Please Explain . . .

[…] Interior Minister Aryeh Deri who is a member of the Corona Cabinet said: 

“We are in a state of terrible emergency. This is made clear by the fact that they are shutting down the economy again. Tefillah is the only permitted gathering that will be allowed, and that is due to its importance. We need to recall that on Pesach, we had 700 ill people per day and we davened on balconies. Now we have ten times that and we are able to daven outside in minyanim as long as we wear masks.”  YWN

According to Minister Deri there is 7000 sick people per day? Is this correct?

Are these 7000 per day ALL in the hospitals? 

Are these 7000 per day those who have been tested? 

What is total number tested? Daily? Since April?

NOW WHAT ARE THE ACTUAL NUMBERS FOR:

Tested?

Testing Method? PCR? Or other?

Hospitalized?

Sick but not hospitalized?

Deaths to date (since April)?

BOMBSHELL REPORT

 BOMBSHELL: WHO Coronavirus PCR Test Primer Sequence is Found in All Human DNA

Of course most everyone will be tested positive or even false positive!

This was important enough that I wanted to get it out immediately. My research into the NCBI database for nucleotide sequences has lead to a stunning discovery. One of the WHO primer sequences in the PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 is found in all human DNA!

The sequence “CTCCCTTTGTTGTGTTGT” is an 18-character primer sequence found in the WHO coronavirus PCR testing protocol document. The primer sequences are what get amplified by the PCR process in order to be detected and designated a “positive” test result. It just so happens this exact same18-character sequence, verbatim, is also found on Homo sapiens chromosome 8! As far as I can tell, this means that the WHO test kits should find a positive result in all humans. Can anyone explain this otherwise?

I really cannot overstate the significance of this finding. At minimum, it should have a notable impact on test results.

* * * * *

Psychologically, many who test positive and feel ill will head to the hospital in fear of dying when all they need to do is swallow the HCQ Protocol and in a week most will feel much much better.

What is the Israeli Government doing?

OR IS IT COMING FROM SHAMAYIM DURING THESE YAMEI TESHUVA??

–––––––––––––––––––

Comments from site:

This is the WHO protocol. I also came across several private companies (Sigma-Aldrich, Thermo Fisher) whose PCR primer sequences were longer and had no such match. So I am not saying that ALL test kits belong to WHO, but if we were to find shenanigans we would expect to find it with the WHO. This really has me shaken, and I am really starting to believe that the WHO designed a test where they would be able to find a positive anywhere they wanted to find one. Also, the PCR test process is inherently very error-prone and even the WHO test may occasionally have false negatives.

Somebody please, follow this link … https://thedoctorwithin.com/blog/2020/03/10/newsletter-march-2020/, scroll down to #3, and then read on for a few minutes. This is written by a doctor in the Bay Area who decided to follow publicly reported cases of people who tested positive for Covid-19, starting with Santa Clara Health and then getting in touch with 50 pulmonologists/clinics. Not one was equipped to be able to test for a virus or to distinguish between influenza and Covid. His conclusion: The 60 (at that time) cases reported in Santa Clara County did not exist and the County website was lying. 

Someone follow the link. Please. Just this once.

source: pieceofmindful

PCR Testing (cont’d)

Coronavirus Testing Suspended at Boston Lab After Many False Positive Results

The Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) has suspended testing for the SARS-CoV-2 virus at Boston based laboratory on Aug. 8, 2020 after the laboratory reported almost 400 false positive tests.

Orig3n Laboratory, a genetics and biotechnology company was suspended after state health officials became aware of an unusually high number of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests reported by the laboratory. An investigation found that there were at least 383 inaccurate positive results that were retested and came back as negative.2 Orig3n Laboratory has approximately sixty nursing homes as their customers.

On Aug. 27, 2020, the MDPH said it notified Orig3n Laboratory that they had been cited with “three significant certification deficiencies that put patients at immediate risk of harm.”4 MDPH found that the laboratory director failed to provide appropriate management of the required processes. The laboratory did not include a control material in the extraction phase of testing and did not adhere to requirements like documenting sanitization of its equipment.

A MDPH spokesperson said, “The Boston lab is required to respond with a written plan of correction, and if action is not taken it can face sanctions,

• Nursing Home Negatively Impacted By False Positive Test Results
• Laboratory Blames Human Error For Inaccuracies
• 77 False Positive Tests Among NFL Players

Dr. Cohen said…

On August 22, BioReference Laboratories reported an elevated number of positive [SARS-CoV-2] PCR test results for NFL players and personnel at multiple clubs. The NFL immediately took necessary actions to ensure the safety of the players and personnel. Our investigation indicated that these were most likely false positive results, caused by an isolated contamination during test preparation in the New Jersey laboratory. Reagents, analyzers and staff were all ruled out as possible causes and subsequent testing has indicated that the issue has been resolved. All individuals impacted have been confirmed negative and informed.

Source:  thevaccinereaction

PCR Testing Questionable — Evidence For False Positives Is Overwhelming

If The PCR Test Is Unreliable – Why Are Health Officials Demanding The Public Be Tested?

By Derrick Broze

As evidence mounts that the “gold standard” test for detecting COVID-19 is unreliable, why are health officials around the world calling for more tests?

In the months since the COVID-19 panic began, health authorities around the world have told the public to “get tested” to help track the spread of SARS-CoV-2. However, as fear and hysteria subside, the scientific community and public at large are calling into question the efficacy of the test used to determine a patients status. This article is a brief examination of the evidence that the PCR test is unreliable and should not be used as a determinant for the number of COVID-19 cases or as a factor in political decisions.

On August 31, I attended a press conference in Houston to ask the Mayor and Houston Health Authority about reports regarding problems with the Texas Department of State Health Services’ numbers on COVID-19 cases. TLAV has previously reported on these concerns with the COVID-19 case numbers in Texas. I also had a chance to ask Houston Health Authority Dr. David Persse about concerns around the test used to detect COVID-19.

The most common test is a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) lab test. This incredibly sensitive technique was developed by Berkeley scientist Kary Mullis, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1993. The test is designed to detect the presence of a virus by amplifying the virus’ genetic material so it can be detected by scientists. The test is viewed as the gold standard; however, it is not without problems.

The PCR test uses chemicals to amplify the virus’s genetic material and then each sample goes through a number of cycles until a virus is recovered. This “cycle threshold” has become a key component in the debate around the efficacy of the PCR test.

Dr. Persse says that when the labs report numbers of COVID-19 cases to the City of Houston they only offer a binary option of “yes” for positive or “no” for negative. “But, in reality, it comes in what is called cycle-thresholds. It’s an inverse relationship, so the higher the number the less virus there was in the initial sample,” Persse explained. “Some labs will report out to 40 cycle-thresholds, and if they get a positive at 40 – which means there is a tiny, tiny, tiny amount of virus there – that gets reported to us as positive and we don’t know any different.”

Persse noted that the key question is, at what value is someone considered still infectious?

“Because if you test me and I have a tiny amount of virus, does that mean I am contagious? That I am still infectious to someone else? If you are shedding a little bit of virus are you just starting? Or are you on the downside?,” Dr. Persse asked in the lobby of Houston City Hall. He believes the answer is for the scientific community to set a national standard for cycle-threshold.

Unfortunately, a national standard would not solve the problems expressed by Dr. Persse and others.

UK Parliament and Scientists Have Concerns About PCR Test

In the first weeks of September, a number of important revelations regarding the PCR test have come to light. First, new research from the University of Oxford’s Center for Evidence-Based Medicine and the University of the West of England found that the PCR test poses the potential for false positives when testing for COVID-19. Professor Carl Heneghan, one of the authors of the study, Viral cultures for COVID-19 infectivity assessment – a systematic review, said there was a risk that an increase in testing in the UK will lead to an increase in the risk of “sample contamination” and thus an increase in COVID-19 cases.

The team reviewed evidence from 25 studies where virus specimens had positive PCR tests. The researchers state that the “genetic photocopying” technique scientists use to magnify the sample of genetic material collected is so sensitive it could be picking up fragments of dead virus from previous infections. The researchers reach a similar conclusion as Dr. David Persse, namely that,

A binary Yes/No approach to the interpretation RT-PCR unvalidated against viral culture will result in false positives with segregation of large numbers of people who are no longer infectious and hence not a threat to public health.

Heneghan, who is also the the editor of BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, told the BBC that the binary approach is a problem and tests should have a cut-off point so that small amounts of virus do not lead to a positive result. This is because of the cycle threshold mentioned by Dr. Persse. A person who is shedding an active virus and someone who has leftover infection could both receive the same positive test result. He also stated that the test could be detecting old virus which would explain the rise in cases in the UK. Heneghan also stated that setting a standard for the cycle threshold would eliminate the quarantining and contact tracing of people who are healthy and help the public better understand the true nature of COVID-19.

The UK’s leading health agency, Public Health England, released an update on the testing methods used to detect COVID-19 and appeared to agree with Professor Heneghan regarding the concerns on the cycle threshold. On September 9, PHE released an update which concluded, “all laboratories should determine the threshold for a positive result at the limit of detection.” 

This is not the first time Heneghan’s work has directly impacted the UK’s COVID-19 policies. In July, UK health secretary Matt Hancock called for an “urgent review” of the daily COVID-19 death numbers produced by Public Health England after it was revealed the stats included people who died from other causes. The Guardian reported:

“The oddity was revealed in a paper by Yoon K Loke and Carl Heneghan of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at Oxford University, called “Why no one can ever recover from Covid-19 in England – a statistical anomaly”.

Their analysis suggests PHE cross-checks the latest notifications of deaths against a database of positive test results – so that anyone who has ever tested positive is recorded in the COVID-19 death statistics.

A Department of Health and Social Care source said: ‘You could have been tested positive in February, have no symptoms, then hit by a bus in July and you’d be recorded as a COVID death.’”

Only days after Hancock called for the review of PHE data, the UK government put an immediate halt to its daily update of death numbers from COVID-19.

On September 8, Heneghan tweeted out another study on the limitations of the PCR test. The study, “SARS-CoV-2 Testing: The Limit of Detection Matters,” examines the limit of detection (LoD) for RNA. The researchers note similar problems with the PCR test and the cycle threshold, concluding, “the ultimate lesson from these studies bears repetition: LoD matters and directly impacts efforts to identify, control, and contain outbreaks during this pandemic.”

Heneghan also recently told the BMJ, “one issue in trying to interpret numbers of detected cases is that there is no set definition of a case. At the moment it seems that a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positive result is the only criterion required for a case to be recognised.”

“In any other disease we would have a clearly defined specification that would usually involve signs, symptoms, and a test result,” Heneghan explained. “We are moving into a biotech world where the norms of clinical reasoning are going out of the window. A PCR test does not equal covid-19; it should not, but in some definitions it does.”

Heneghan says he is concerned that as soon as there is the appearance of an outbreak there is panic and over-reacting. “This is a huge problem because politicians are operating in a non-evidence-based way when it comes to non-drug interventions,” he stated.

The Evidence For False Positives Is Overwhelming

A recent report from NPR outlines the dangers of false positives with the PCR tests. Andrew Cohen, director of the Center for Research on Aquatic Bioinvasions, was hired by the state of California to study an invasion of non-native mussels. The researchers took water samples and used a PCR test to search for genetic material from the mussels. After the tests came back overwhelmingly positive, Cohen grew suspicious.

“I began to realize that many of these — if not all of these — were false positives, especially when they started being reported in waters that had chemistry that would not allow the mussels to reproduce and establish themselves,” he told NPR. NPR notes that, depending on the lab, there was a 2 to 8 percent false positive rate.

Once COVID-19 was declared a pandemic, Cohen said he began asking if the reports of people with absolutely no symptoms and positive PCR test results could be false positives. “I began wondering whether these asymptomatic carriers weren’t in large part or in whole part the human counterparts of those false-positive results of quagga and zebra mussels in all those water bodies across the West,” he said.

Cohen emphasized the importance of researchers taking potential false positive PCR results seriously.

As near as we can tell, the medical establishment and public health authorities and researchers … appear to be assuming that the false-positive rate in in the PCR based test is zero, or at least so low that we can ignore it.

Cohen is correct that the scientific authorities need to take false positives seriously, especially when a person can be sent to isolate or quarantine for weeks due to a positive test result. Even the U.S. FDA’s own fact sheet on testing acknowledges the dangers posed by false positives:

The CDC 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel has been designed to minimize the likelihood of false positive test results. However, in the event of a false positive result, risks to patients could include the following: a recommendation for isolation of the patient, monitoring of household or other close contacts for symptoms, patient isolation that might limit contact with family or friends and may increase contact with other potentially COVID-19 patients, limits in the ability to work, the delayed diagnosis and treatment for the true infection causing the symptoms, unnecessary prescription of a treatment or therapy, or other unintended adverse effects.

A CDC fact sheet also acknowledges the possibility of false positives with the PCR test.

"What does it mean if I have a positive test result?

*If you have a positive test result, it is very likely that you have COVID-19. Therefore, it is also likely that you may be placed in isolation to avoid spreading the virus to others. There is a very small chance that this test can give a positive result that is wrong (a false positive result). Your healthcare provider will work with you to determine how best to care for you based on the test results, medical history, and your symptoms. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/downloads/Factsheet-for-Patients-2019-nCoV.pdf"

Professor Heneghan believes the confusion around COVID-19 has come as a result of a shift away from “evidence-based medicine.” In a recent opinion piece published at The Spectator, Heneghan and Tom Jefferson, a senior associate tutor and honorary research fellow at the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Oxford, wrote that patients have become a “prisoner of a system labelling him or her as ‘positive’ when we are not sure what that label means.” The two scientists offer this conclusion and warning:

Governments are producing a series of contradictory and confusing policies which have a brief shelf life as the next crisis emerges. It is increasingly clear the evidence is often ignored. Keeping up to date is a full time occupation, and the advances of the last 30 years have at best been put on hold.

The duties of a good doctor include working in partnership with patients to inform them about what they want or need in a way they can understand, and respecting their rights to reach decisions with you about their treatment and care. Questions need to be asked as to how this will occur if you don’t see your doctor, particularly if all you have to do is queue in at a drive in to get your answer.

And ultimately what is a ‘good test’? We think it’s the test which helps your doctor narrow the uncertainty around the origins and management of your problem.

Question Everything, Come To Your Own Conclusions.

Source: The Last American Vagabond

Derrick Broze, a staff writer for The Last American Vagabond, is a journalist, author, public speaker, and activist. He is the co-host of Free Thinker Radio on 90.1 Houston, as well as the founder of The Conscious Resistance Network & The Houston Free Thinkers. https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/category/derrick-broze/

Become a Natural Blaze Patron and Support Health Freedom HERE.

__________________________

The CDC Fact Sheet was inserted by me.