NY Times: Nine Out of Ten COVID19 Tests are Wrong

Written by John O'Sullivan on September 2, 2020. Posted in Current News

In the past week we already reported the CDC quietly admitted only 9,210 US deaths are directly attributed to COVID19 and neither the US Nor UK Have ANY Excess Deaths. Now add to the mix that nine out of ten COVID tests are wrong, according to The New York Times.

Is it any wonder more people are calling this shambles a scamdemic?

The New York Times reports that as many as nine out of ten coronavirus tests are wrong. The newspaper tells us:

“The most widely used diagnostic test for the new coronavirus, called a PCR test, provides a simple yes-no answer to the question of whether a patient is infected…. The results may include a rough estimate of the amount of virus in the patient’s body…. In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.” [emphasis added]

It’s all guesswork, you see.  When the article tells us “barely any virus” it is word play, disinformation. What the tests reveal are proteins not virus.  We confidently can assert no such virus has even been proven to exists.

Just like the very existence of the COVID19 virus itself when no laboratory anywhere in the world has been able to identify and isolate this alleged new coronavirus to sufficiently present a ‘gold standard’ to allow other researchers to develop a vaccine (if we even needed one!).

The medical world has been chasing a phantom because, as we reported, ‘Group Think & Guess Work Taints COVID19 Medical Diagnoses.’

The author of the article, Apoorva Mandavilli, admits that these tests rely heavily on an amplification technique that attempts to increase the likelihood of detection the slightest amount of the telltale protein that scientists have been claiming is proof of the presence of the novel coronavirus.

Indeed, at the very best a positive test can show that there is ‘some’ coronavirus in a patient – it could be ANY coronavirus – even a trace of common cold. The standard test, itself, is not designed to measure the viral load, the key to determining disease causation.

As Apoorva puts it:

“The PCR test amplifies genetic matter from the virus in cycles; the fewer cycles required, the greater the amount of virus, or viral load, in the sample. The greater the viral load, the more likely the patient is to be contagious.

This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients, although it could tell them how infectious the patients are.”

“Never sent to doctors or patients?” Talk about the blind leading the blind!

The ‘genetic matter’ being magnified is actually common to us all – whether we have been sick or not! This is why there so many reported ‘asymptomatic’ cases (people who have nothing wrong with them, despite a positive test). Indeed, so worthless as a medical diagnosis theses tests can be relied on to merely prove scientifically that the patient is human – nothing more.

Some experts argue ELISA testing needs to be happening as well.  But Elisa test is controversial. There is an argument that specific antibodies cannot be attributed to specific virus particles because isolation is not possible. All methods are indirect and therefore not provable.

The NY Times article then quotes one virologist, Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at Columbia University in New York,  apparently tearing her hair out over the ineptitude of the whole viral calibration process. Rasmussen laments:

“It’s just kind of mind-blowing to me that people are not recording the C.T. values from all these tests — that they’re just returning a positive or a negative. It would be useful information to know if somebody’s positive, whether they have a high viral load or a low viral load.”

We can be sure Angela Rasmussen is a conscientious and capable virologist but she, like all other medical professionals, is being let down by those in authority who appear to be exploiting the uncertainties and confusion for their own self interests.

But we do know the CDC were not being honest – or offering clarification – about the Covid numbers and belatedly had to admit that only 6% of all the reported deaths recorded were confidently attributed to Covid. The other 94% had at least 2 to 3 other serious illnesses which may have been the true cause of death. For sure, we know the overwhelming majority of those were of very advanced age; 90% in nursing homes and likely to die within months anyway.

Moreover, we also know from pathologists that not a single autopsy reported anywhere in the world has ascertained COVID19 as the sole cause of death. Deaths suspected as being due to a virus were found, upon post mortem, to have BACTERIAL causes rather than any virus. Many such autopsies wrongly believed initially to be COVID19 point to thrombosis as actual cause of death.

However, when group think government bureaucrats crunch the numbers and fudge their outcomes we see that this new ‘virus’ is very much man-made – not in labs – but by the pens of corrupt/incompetent officials.

As we reported earlier this week, independent analyst Andrew Mather crunched the numbers and revealed:

“Both the US and UK have zero excess deaths from covid. They show massive excess deaths but that’s by double counting. There are no matching medical deaths for those covid deaths.

They’re already ‘in’, with none spare for the excess deaths. Basically covid does exactly what they’ve been telling you: attacks old and sick people accelerating their deaths by a month or a few months. Essentially, nobody ‘new’ dies… not enough to make this year any different from any other year. People die. But there’s no ‘massive contagion’ creating excess deaths.”

As many more analysts uncover shenanigans, we are ever closer to ascertaining that so much of the misinformation is a deliberate cocktail of fear and opportunism to exploit the vulnerable for profit and advance a dystopian agenda contrary to the greater good.

About the author: John O’Sullivan John is CEO and co-founder (with Dr Tim Ball) of Principia Scientific International (PSI).  John is a seasoned science writer and legal analyst who assisted Dr Ball in defeating world leading climate expert, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann in the ‘science trial of the century‘. O’Sullivan is credited as the visionary who formed the original ‘Slayers’ group of scientists in 2010 who then collaborated in creating the world’s first full-volume debunk of the greenhouse gas theory plus their new follow-up book.

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.

Trackback from your site.