10767
Comments (959)
sorted by:
470
reckoningSE 470 points ago +472 / -2

it's scientifically proven at this point (excessive PCR cycles)

218
TrumpAndGodWin 218 points ago +222 / -4

Alex Jones was right again. [Edited because I can't verify this part ->. Also, the creator of the test said it should not be used for covid.] And possibly the guy is dead after challenging and insulting Fauci.

141
Levelup 141 points ago +143 / -2

Dem governors lock down > Controlled opposition McConnell takes the blame for no covid relief > small businesses goes bankrupt > Amazon and big tech swoops in and takes control even more.

Both parties are in on it. Perdue has made millions from his stocks during covid. Chaos is good for him, he can buy and sell with his insider knowledge. Globalists in both the dem and repub party has had their hands in our pockets for a long time.

They are all desperate to get rid of Trump, the only one exposing the fraud on both sides. We need to be in the streets protesting.

96
Ghostof_PatrickHenry 96 points ago +96 / -0

The other goal of COVID was to paint the government as some sort of trusted savior, in order to usher in a federal nanny-state.

57
deleted 57 points ago +58 / -1
26
RonBohr 26 points ago +26 / -0

I knew a guy, who claimed to be Tunisian, who disappeared about a week before 9/11. Just up and poof, no notice, no nothing, gone. We worked at a food warehouse in central Indiana. Wasn't until about a month later when shock wore off that we said, "Hey, what happened to...?" I believe the manager contacted the EffBeeEye. Never heard anything else.

8
2016TrumpMAGA 8 points ago +8 / -0

I have some inside knowledge on this. Several friends were congressional staff and worked in the WH during Bush 2. Al Qaeda was not hiding under every nook and cranny, but if you knew some of the shit we stopped from happening, you'd piss yourself. Having said that, FUCK THE PATRIOT ACT!

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
7
11
Silver 11 points ago +16 / -5

So every column decided to fail at the same time?

19
Donaldiscool 19 points ago +21 / -2

Building 7 was an inside job. Anybody to says otherwise is an idiot or deceiver.

7
TGNX 7 points ago +14 / -7

Every column was weakened by the impact and the high temperature of the fire. Was it hot enough to melt it? No, but it didn't need to be. At those temperatures steel loses half of its strength. Here's a guy with a forge to explain it, visually.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzF1KySHmUA

4
core101 4 points ago +6 / -2

It was a cover-up, the biggest crime scene ever. The line was crossed, when instead of securing the scene, Neo-cons ordered the scene/evidence be destroyed and removed right-away.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
7
MAGA45_2 7 points ago +7 / -0

I don’t trust China. Why would I trust this?

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
4Godand4Country 1 point ago +1 / -0

Whoever downvoted is a cuck

5
drsowells1fan 5 points ago +5 / -0

I even bought the.."you have to own the haystack, if you're going to find the terrorist needle" rationale for the NSA listening to ordinary Americans.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
22
Stylishman 22 points ago +22 / -0

More than that, it will make most people utterly reliant on the government for their survival. Easiest type of control there is.

20
redhawk 20 points ago +21 / -1

yah the erosion of civil liberties and the constitution, to be replaced with medical authoritarian fascists. In China health officials can show up at your door and say you were contact traced to be in same location as someone who is positive, and therefore demand/order you to report to a centralized lockdown where you are essentially locked in a room with a bunch of other people some of this probably having covid. If you didn't have it before good chance you catch it then and it 'proves' they were right to contact trace and lock you down. Literally can have health officials target anyone and just no questions asked boss you out of your home straight into a death trap.

14
D0NNIE_DARK0 14 points ago +14 / -0

All this is a given but the giddiness of some Americans to enact these nonsensical measures is deeply disturbing.

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
10
D0NNIE_DARK0 10 points ago +10 / -0

I think most people just have a herd mentality. Some sheep just can’t tell the difference between the wolf ready to feast and the sheepdog and shepherd keeping them safe.

2
operation_eland 2 points ago +2 / -0

Only real people are capable of good and evil at their core. The vast majority of normies are simply acted upon and repeat whatever they are programmed with.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
4
redhawk 4 points ago +4 / -0

people are literally excited to get the vaccine now so things can back to 'normal'. Its a mass psychological operation run with textbook feartactics. They have been priming the public for years now, each year or two they have a new flu scare.

12
Magastein143 12 points ago +13 / -1

but they did the exact opposite. This has red pilled so many and now no one trusts the government. Maybe they should have been a little more discreet when not following their own rules

8
Neil_Patrick_Covfefe 8 points ago +8 / -0

They are desperate. They could ride out one Trump term but not two.

6
IWalkedsofaraway 6 points ago +7 / -1

When Trump retains office a huge number of officials will likely resign and move to new Zealand.

6
Kevin_Green 6 points ago +6 / -0

It never ceases to amaze me how horrible their plans are, but then again if I did drugs all the time my plans would probably be as bad.

13
Neil_Patrick_Covfefe 13 points ago +13 / -0

The inevitable downfall of corrupt and authoritarian regimes is that they are not meritocratic. Incompetence accumulates and rises to the top.

37
DL535 37 points ago +37 / -0

My thinking has been like this for weeks now:

  1. COVID itself is real enough, but at least 95% of the damage to society was caused by an excessive, hysterical overreaction.

  2. In the spring-summer 2020 period, COVID hysteria was knowingly pushed by the media and Democrats to damage DJT by killing the US economy, and also skew the economy in favor of large "cucked" corporations that Democrats effectively control. In several states, most notoriously NY, they also took the opportunity to literally murder Trump voters by deliberately introducing COVID into senior care facilities.

  3. In the fall of 2020 and continuing to now, the continued lockdowns and shutdowns have a different objective: to prevent Trump supporters from going into the streets after the deep state stole the election for Biden. The actual morbidity due to COVID is small and is almost entirely in the very old who would be vulnerable to any respiratory virus, not just COVID.

  4. As for the false positive tests, that is definitely a real issue (statistically it is impossible for them NOT to be happening especially given the well known issues with PCR), and simply functions as a useful tool to keep people scared, alienated and indoors while the coup proceeds.

11
AngryBrit2 11 points ago +22 / -11
  1. No, "COVID-19" is not real. It's a mere construct of a non-specific set of non-specific symptoms associated with a hypothetical causal agent which has never been shown to exist or cause these symptoms.

  2. There are no good statistics for "SARS-CoV-2" RT-PCR tests because there is no gold standard by which to determine the accuracy of tests or the infection rate in any tested group.

PROVE ME WRONG.

15
LadyPersephone 15 points ago +17 / -2

I don't understand what you mean by never been shown to exist. You can see COVID-19 viruses on the scanning and transmission electron microscope, and differentiate it from other similar viruses (like MERS-cov and SARS-cov) based on the specific nucleocapsid proteins and the spike protein coatings which gives them their name (the corona).

4
AngryBrit2 4 points ago +10 / -6

You can see COVID-19 viruses on the scanning and transmission electron microscope, and differentiate it from other similar viruses

No. What you can *see *are instrumental effects of electron microscopy which have never been positively identified with the theoretical construct of the "COVID-19 virus". That's never been done, in the first place, because this hypothesised entity has *never *been purified from an alleged host, never mind proved to cause disease in vivo in healthy organisms, and by purified I do not mean the totally impure gemisch that modern virology has given the name "isolate". You are merely interpreting what you are seeing in accord with the narrative of a research paradigm, and that paradigm's methodology lacks the epistemic power to prove its hypothesis.

based on the specific nucleocapsid proteins and the spike protein coatings which gives them their name (the corona).

This is purely a theoretical explanation of instrumental phenomena. Moreover, it is one thing to to give a chemical account of such phenomena; it is entirely another thing to identify them with an exogenous, infectious, disease-causing agent, much less the specific one being blamed for some set of symptoms.

12
BasedInFact 12 points ago +12 / -0

I updooted you both, because this isn’t my area of expertise, but it this is exactly the type of debate that needs to be widely conducted, in public and in private scientific debates... and is precisely the kind of debate that the Leftist totalitarian media has shamefully, shamefully banned.

The sickness in our institutions > the sickness in our bloodstreams

3
LadyPersephone 3 points ago +4 / -1

First of all, I can see from your post that you are trying to apply Koch’s postulates, which were created for bacteria, to COVID-19, which is a virus - namely his second clause, that "that the micro-organism must be extracted and isolated from the diseased animal and subsequently grown in culture" for it to be verifiably proven.

These criteria however, were written in 1890, before the discovery of viruses, and are not a good measure of proving whether a virus does or does not exist.

Viruses, unlike bacteria, require host cells in which to replicate, so cannot be isolated from a host, as you say, in the same way Koch defined with bacteria. It would be wrong to look at COVID proof starting from this point and using this measure. This is because viruses are obligate intracellular parasites - so to isolate a particular virus, we have to provide it with live mammalian cells to infect.

One colleague who has dedicated years working with bat viruses and how they interact with human antiviral responses is Arinjay Banerjee. Being familiar with MERS, his team used the same method as there, namely culturing the virus on immunodeficient cells, as this enables it to multiply rapidly.

The source of infection is confirmed by extracting genetic material from the virus, and, of course, sequencing its genome - then compared with all previous known coronaviruses to determine whether it is or isn't a novel one.

Banerjee team has done this successfully, and his work has been confirmed by researchers from SRI, McMaster University and the University of Toronto, then corroborated and improved upon worldwide, by researchers at our own university and elsewhere. (this was back in March)

So it is incorrect to say that COVID-19 has not yet been isolated, because it has. Moreover, a virus cannot be purified from a host due to its nature as an obligate intracellular parasite.

I applaud the fact we are all researching this, though; I hate it when people just blindly follow one thing or another without critical thinking. u/BasedInFact is right that these debates absolutely need to happen publicly and outwardly, because echochambers only lead to ruin. It's the only way safe treatments can be achieved, by assessing risks vs. benefits for everything we do.

tl;dr: COVID is definitely real. We are still learning a lot about it and improving treatments constantly. But it is definitely an asshoe, novel virus that came from China at the end of last year, and it's not the first, second, or third time this has happened.

1
unicornpoop 1 point ago +1 / -0

So what you're saying is....they makin all this shit up.

-4
IdealWrongdoer -4 points ago +2 / -6

Prove that those are actually the disease causing agent and that they correspond to the same full sequence genome of SARS-CoV-2.

6
clarence-thomas 6 points ago +7 / -1

Wtf are you going on about? You can argue that the government response is excessive (and I mostly everyone probably agrees) but you invalidate your entire argument when you claim the disease itself doesn't even exist. What do you think is going on when there is an outbreak in a senior care home and so many people die?

The other guy is right, whether its a microscope or genome sequence showing its similarity to SARS-cov, the virus does objectively exist

1
deepbake 1 point ago +1 / -0

I cant prove you wrong because you are correct

9
Neil_Patrick_Covfefe 9 points ago +9 / -0

and also skew the economy in favor of large "cucked" corporations that Democrats effectively control

I think it's the other way around; the corporations own the democrats ( and the RINOs)

In the fall of 2020 and continuing to now, the continued lockdowns and shutdowns have a different objective: to prevent Trump supporters from going into the streets after the deep state stole the election for Biden.

IMO, it's just to punish the country for voting for Trump. They really do feel entitled to rule over us, and look down on us as insolent children.

3
4Godand4Country 3 points ago +3 / -0

I've been saying this. Its punishment.

11
ineX0r2 11 points ago +12 / -1

Streets of Minecraft.

4
deleted 4 points ago +5 / -1
2
DrainWashington 2 points ago +2 / -0

Did he buy/sell right before the pandemic hit?

1
Levelup 1 point ago +1 / -0

He's one of the richest most active insider traders of all the elites.

17
Qualityproduct 17 points ago +17 / -0

I hadn't seen verification. He said anything about covid... But he did say you can't use it to diagnose, especially in an epidemic or pandemic situation. He also shitted on Fauci. He was the O.G. of calling Fauci a fraud. Like 30 years ago until he died.

7
deleted 7 points ago +12 / -5
54
deleted 54 points ago +54 / -0
13
nimblenavigator0519 13 points ago +14 / -1

So I've read multiple studies that claim to have isolated the virus using bronchoalveolar lavage for sampling, innoculation in cell culture, and then harvesting. Why do you say nobody has isolated it? Do you disagree with their methods or is there something I'm missing?

30
deleted 30 points ago +30 / -0
10
nimblenavigator0519 10 points ago +10 / -0

I see what you're saying. The papers I looked at only had electron micrographs of exosomes that were "confirmed" COVID with RT-PCR.

I'll take a look again to see if I can find any stronger evidence. Just seems hard to believe that the entire scientific community would either a) be in on the scam; or b) repeat the same mistake ad infinitum, though I have read a few papers that call the whole pandemic into question so there is a small voice of independent thought out there.

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

23
deleted 23 points ago +23 / -0
6
IdealWrongdoer 6 points ago +6 / -0

Keep in mind that at the beginning of all this, many doctors and scientists WERE speaking out about this, but were getting immediately censored.

There is now a worldwide doctors' movement to expose this.

More info

1
Wexit-Delecto 1 point ago +1 / -0

Just seems hard to believe that the entire scientific community would either a) be in on the scam

Epstein was real cozy with scientists.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +2 / -3
12
deleted 12 points ago +13 / -1
3
deleted 3 points ago +4 / -1
11
deleted 11 points ago +12 / -1
4
AngryBrit2 4 points ago +4 / -0

PCR tests don't pick up "virus particles". They merely amplify genetic sequences based on some assumptions of what one is looking for.

2
operation_eland 2 points ago +2 / -0

Think about how a lot of these tests are conducted as well - the swabs of all these people are put together with dozens of other samples, sealed in boxes and then sent to a lab probably via UPS or someone who smash the fuck out of them and then the lab runs 35-40 cycles magnifying any potential microscopic amount of viral material a billion times. I remember seeing testing sites in Florida during the summer when they supposedly had the "second wave" there which recorded 100% rates of infection on tests done. All I could think when someone tells me 100% is DANGER, DANGER WIL ROBINSON.

8
getfuckedcommies 8 points ago +9 / -1

This just isn't true. My lab works with COVID-19 and it behaves just like any other virus.

And I've personally sequenced the booger multiple times from positive patients. It's extremely trivial. You can even use Sanger sequencing (outdated at this point, and cheap as all hell) to sequence novel bits of the genome using consensus sequences from the usual strains.

It absolutely is a real thing, it's just blown way the fuck out of proportion.

5
IdealWrongdoer 5 points ago +5 / -0

How do you know the genome you are sequencing is really a novel coronavirus?

Any full genome that is published is automatically suspect because there is no documented evidence that it was originally isolated from nature. Are you aware that the CDC owns patents on coronavirus, as well as the vaccines, and even the detection kits?

5
Wexit-Delecto 5 points ago +5 / -0

Where is this year’s flu?

1
Patriot_Grazer 1 point ago +1 / -0

Amen

3
tentonbudgie 3 points ago +3 / -0

Hi China!

1
BasedInFact 1 point ago +1 / -0

You are assssshhooooe!

Rove, China

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
-1
deleted -1 points ago +2 / -3
10
deleted 10 points ago +10 / -0
6
Wexit-Delecto 6 points ago +6 / -0

They also told us that Americans burning oil causes global warming but Chinese burning the same oil doesn’t.

Not credible.

4
IdealWrongdoer 4 points ago +4 / -0

The same Johns Hopkins that was a main contributor to Event 201?

2
AngryBrit2 2 points ago +2 / -0

Lol. "Isolation" is the virology literature is obtaining an "isolate" that is full of additive chemicals, foreign organic matter like bovine serum and cellular debris from lysis. Words don't change reality.

-12
deleted -12 points ago +4 / -16
9
deleted 9 points ago +9 / -0
6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
5
Redpillgirlfrommars 5 points ago +8 / -3

Or that children have the brain capacity to understand & make the decision that they’re trans. Or that flooding refugees into a country has nothing but beneficial results. Or that a majority of violent crime is definitely not committed by black people. Or that Trump is a Russian puppet installed by Putin himself despite the Mueller report concluding there’s zero evidence of that whatsoever. Or that covid is a rampant killer and that daring to step foot outside your home during a FuCkIng GloBaL pAndEmIc brands you ass a mass grandma murderer, unless of course you’re “putting your own life at risk” by going out to protest for a drug addicted criminal that died from a drug overdose and not from the officer restraining him. Or that looters/rioters were white supremacists, or that the “OK” hand gesture is a white supremacist symbol, or that fetuses are just “clumps of cells”, or that white silence = violence, or that women are oppressed, or that black people will never be successful/smart/etc because of reasons they can’t control (bigotry of low expectations), or that there’s zero biological difference between men and women.

Oh man I could go on forever.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
6
chadnadian 6 points ago +6 / -0

Hong Cough.

4
Fluffy_Indigo 4 points ago +4 / -0

3 downvotes for Chink Chest? This shit is hilarious.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
1
BasedInFact 1 point ago +1 / -0

Xieasles.

5
walls4america 5 points ago +5 / -0

Last night on InfoWars they showed a speaker from Australia who demonstrated that even testing a soft drink showed that the soft drink had covid!! And quoted other scientists who said the covid vaccines alter DNA and cause women to be sterile. So I guess it’s all on course with Gates’ and his father’s agenda.

7
D0NNIE_DARK0 7 points ago +7 / -0

The President of Tanzania called it out in May. He got positive tests for a papaya, a goat and engine oil. It’s ridiculous.

Elon Musk and many others have gotten conflicting results even in one session from the same lab, same nurse, same site. How is any of this scientific if the results are not repeatable.

4
4Godand4Country 4 points ago +4 / -0

See Alex jones "end game"? Find it.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
TrumpAndGodWin 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks, even though I listen to him on most days I haven't seen that yet.

48
DLane1 48 points ago +48 / -0

Exactly. The testing places know that the results are false positives but don't want to get sued if they call an RT-PCR test "negative" that another place might call "positive" as there is no standard cutofff.

Since an infectious exposure is around 1000 virions, that equates to somewhere around 20-25 cycles, thus anything over 30 cycles is easily false positive.

22
booblitchutz 22 points ago +22 / -0

Exactly the lack of published standards AND the cycles used for each positive test mean the test is a black hole. Nobody knows how many cycles have been or should be used. How has testing changed as the case counts rise? That info is deliberately lost forever.

The lack of transparency is simply astounding given the seriousness of the public impact of these positive test results. They used fear to grab this power and refuse to allow any transparency to protect it!

10
deleted 10 points ago +11 / -1
8
MAGALogic 8 points ago +8 / -0

Thank you for the explanation. I wasn't familiar with the subject matter but I am trying to learn and better understand what is happening. Thanks.

13
deleted 13 points ago +14 / -1
5
MNMathtic 5 points ago +5 / -0

How about calling it "PCR amplification"? Or something like that

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
1
getfuckedcommies 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's used as a test all the time. Specifically to measure viral titers in the blood or a particular tissue of interest. If you have any questions on the particulars, let me know. More than happy to explain!

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
-9
deleted -9 points ago +1 / -10
8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
-9
deleted -9 points ago +1 / -10
11
deleted 11 points ago +11 / -0
3
MAGA_100X 3 points ago +3 / -0

I heard that the tests are to be conducted UP TO a given number of cycles (40-45), but they may become positive "way below" that number.

Is this true?

4
DLane1 4 points ago +4 / -0

Of course. The total number of cycles affects the amount of time the overall takes, but if there is a lot of RNA, it will be detected at much lower cycles. For a better understanding just type PCR into a search engine and look at images. Each cycle is a doubling event, so you get exponential amplification of the original nucleic acid present. Detection at 40 cycles means you started with a forensic trace level of nucleic acid.

1
MAGA_100X 1 point ago +1 / -0

Do we know if most reach positive around 40, or is it 20?

That's a game changer, right there....

2
DLane1 2 points ago +2 / -0

Hmm, not quite the right interpretation. At 20 Ct, a large amount of viral RNA was detected and is thus called "positive" even if a person is shedding zero infectious virions. It is an indirect, correlation type test. At 40 Ct, a positive might come up but it is meaningless because that amount of starting RNA could have come from someone sneezing in the testing room or on the swab before it was used to collect.

It is more like a light source. You can have a really bright one or a very dim one. Depending on where you decide it is bright "enough" is the line between light and dark. If there is no common definition, then some tests will be "light" and some "dark".

1
MAGA_100X 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hmm, not quite the right interpretation. At 20 Ct, a large amount of viral RNA was detected and is thus called "positive" even if a person is shedding zero infectious virions. It is an indirect, correlation type test. At 40 Ct, a positive might come up but it is meaningless because that amount of starting RNA could have come from someone sneezing in the testing room or on the swab before it was used to collect.

Exactly, but isn't there a correlation between "viral load" and "likelihood of shedding"?
Most agree anything found above 35 cycles isn't even viable... But if everyone tested positive @ only 10 cycles, many more would be sick...

1
DLane1 1 point ago +1 / -0

10 cycles is way too soon. That generally indicates a probe failure.

As far as I have seen there are no comprehensive manuscripts correlating viral load (based on actual viral culture) & shedding (actually infectious virions. Many virions made during replication are not competent as RNA polymerase is quite error prone.) The few that have tried indicate no correlation, so the RT-PCR testing is meaningless from a disease spread standpoint.

-1
bigchungus420 -1 points ago +1 / -2

Could I get a source as to where you’re getting that 1000 virion/20-25 cycle number?

A false positive means that the test is positive when you’re not infected at all (I.e. 0 RNA fragments). It doesn’t mean there was a small amount of RNA that lead to an asymptomatic infection.

5
MAGA_100X 5 points ago +5 / -0

Anything detected above 35 cycles can't produce viable virus. (Raoult)

Even fauci says: above 35 "is mostly dead virus parts".

4
DLane1 4 points ago +4 / -0

Don't forget that RT-PCR only tests for a fragment of the virus' RNA (usually thr RdRP) and the majority of people still test "positive" well after recovery using that test. Of thousands of publications on testing, not one has recovered infectious virus after 7 days from onset of symptoms. Meaning the natural immune system for the vast majority of people fights off this infection, exactly like it does with influenze, RSV and the 4 common cold coronaviruses.

3
DLane1 3 points ago +3 / -0

1000 virions and cycle is a general number from pretty much all respiratory infectious viruses, expressed as ID50 (50% of exposed people will be infected at this level). Any virology textbook has these number.

This publication from Mike Mina is the most salient to this discussion: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2025631

25
19
LugNuts 19 points ago +19 / -0

Lowering the Ct will make it look like COVID vanished. I guarantee this is the magic plan. Nobody can tell what company is doing the testing, what Ct they are using, or even what primer sets. They are making a fortune in testing and have a potent political weapon.

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
2
Trumpdup4prez 2 points ago +2 / -0

You’re exactly right.

If under some streak of dumb luck, Biden gets in, this is exactly what they’ll do. This way he looks like a hero.

1
LugNuts 1 point ago +1 / -0

well, maybe not 'looks like', but will be promoted as such.

14
Liberty4All 14 points ago +14 / -0

I didn't know that Florida had done that. So the Florida DoH should be getting the cycle data now.

The real question is what Florida will do with the information. Will they follow up on positives to see if they or others in code contact with them developed symptoms? Will they correlate the percent who developed symptoms with the number of cycles run on the PCR test?

If they do, it could be the beginning of the end of the "casedemic" in Florida, because I am pretty sure that DeSantis has the balls to use the data to say that positives over a certain number of cycles are not really positive in the absence of symptoms. Or just flat out refuse to accept PCR tests over a certain number of cycles.

It will take time to see which PCR positive people develop symptoms, and then to collect and analyze the data, though.

Hopefully DeSantis already has people setting up the infrastructure and procedures to do the data collection and analysis.

6
MAGALogic 6 points ago +6 / -0

That is my hope as well but we have to see what happens.

5
Trumpdup4prez 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yep. Watch covid disappear in Florida first. They’ll say it’s the sunlight or some nonsense and not the PCR test

9
Tradox 9 points ago +9 / -0

This entire scenario is designed to do nothing more than get everyone to accept being IMPRISONED in their own homes.

I've told this to a few people and they look at like I've got sh*t for brains. Then I ask them if they are quarantined, and others know, and they leave the house what will happen? They immediately say they will likely be told to return home and will be fined and then forced back home by somebody (with a gun).

When you are forced to stay at home at gunpoint you are being IMPRISONED.

Suddenly they cringe a bit, their brow goes high, and they start nodding in agreement. The light has come on.

23
carnivore-pede 23 points ago +23 / -0

AZ is at 40x it is insane!

16
deleted 16 points ago +16 / -0
4
deleted 4 points ago +5 / -1
7
DoesItWorkAlready 7 points ago +7 / -0

Before the shutdown, I played poker with a bunch of nurses from a middle size town hospital. I asked what the normal hospital load is for a bad year of influenza.

The answer: "110%".

3
T_DforTrump2020 3 points ago +3 / -0

6 family members at Mass General. 3 nurse friends at other hospitals. Cases, yes. Mostly people who are overly worried about it, have good insurance, and can pay for their time in beds. Plenty of beds open, and most people are released. It's all a joke.

13
pseudosapient 13 points ago +13 / -0

To elaborate a bit. In a perfect world you could run an arbitrary number of PCR cycles without an issue... but it's not a perfect world.

A PCR cycle, ideally, effectively goes "any DNA that has a region that matches this start and end gets doubled". With the idea that after a bunch of doublings it becomes fairly obvious if the target is present or not. (One classic method at the end is, essentially, toss in some DNA of known sizes, sort the result by size, and check if anything is the 'right size' for what you're looking for. (E.g. if you're looking for something that should be 1140 base pairs long, you might toss in DNA with a length of 1000, 1050, 1100, 1150, 1200, etc. And then you get a nice 'ruler' within which you can search for your target.) There are other methods of course.)

The idea being that you pick a start and end 'key' (primer) that's fairly unique to the thing you're hunting for, with the size check at the end as an additional filter / crosscheck.

But everything at those scales is fuzzy. There is no such thing as "matching only that specific sequence" - if something is "close enough" it will still, occasionally, double. Like jamming a jigsaw puzzle piece in where it doesn't belong. And even if something does match it won't always double, especially as the concentration increases. Eventually, you don't get doubling because, well, there isn't enough free material around to be able to double.

So what happens as the number of cycles increases? Well, if there is a true match it'll double for the first while, then saturate and flatten out to quasi-linear. And if there's something that isn't a good fit, and say replicates 10% of the time? Well, it'll still be exponential growth, just slower. But you replicate enough and you will still saturate sooner or later.

3
Whirlybot 3 points ago +3 / -0

This is really useful. Thanks

3
deleted 3 points ago +4 / -1
3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
3
deleted 3 points ago +4 / -1
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
3
DoesItWorkAlready 3 points ago +4 / -1

this would be the "it's too complicated to understand, just trust us" reply.

Trust is gone, in case you hadn't noticed.

If you can't explain your test easily in a low trust environment, your test is useless.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +2 / -4
2
DoesItWorkAlready 2 points ago +2 / -0

You and I probably don’t have the faintest understanding of a network stack, nor any understanding of how an LTE antenna works, or how data is switched as it races through all the networking infrastructure

Speak for yourself. I'm an EE who did network engineering for 20 years. I can tell you how the electrons wiggle when you make an AWS API call.

I'm also a trained metrologist. i.e. an expert in measurement. My rule in becoming an expert is if I can't write a procedure that the technical staff can understand, then my method of measurement is probably bullshit. I've had to explain measurement techniques to field engineers, and have succeeded.

I also know enough biology to teach my kids high school biology (which I have to since the schools shut down).

The PCR test isn't that complicated to understand for anyone with a Bachelor of Science degree who has been a responsible engineer for a product or service, or a computer scientist who understands exponential functions in their bones (which should be at least half of them). That's millions of Americans.

The PCR test beyond about 32 replications (yes depending on the sampling technique) is complete bullshit. And questionable somewhere between 28 and 32.

The guy who won the Nobel for creating the PCR technique is correct.

-3
deleted -3 points ago +2 / -5
3
DoesItWorkAlready 3 points ago +3 / -0

What’s your alma mater? Probably a state school

The elitism is dripping all over you, it looks disgusting. You should wipe that crap off.

1
pseudosapient 1 point ago +1 / -0

I might suggest that starting off with belittling the person you are replying to is not the most effective technique.

Yes, this is oversimplified. All summarizations are.

I could say "to understand this go get a BSc"; that wouldn't be particularly helpful. (And someone with a MSc would in turn complain...)

If QPCR is performed with known negative controls and they are consistently producing negative results even at a “high” Ct for the given experiment, then a sample that tests positive is very, very likely to be a real positive.

...or an unintended partial match of something else present in the sample that is nevertheless close enough to replicate. Negative controls don't help with that.

(...well, kinda. It does help if your negative control happens to include said something else. It doesn't help if e.g. the novel sequence you selected for your primer isn't as novel as you thought it was and there's some other benign virus floating around somewhere (not in your negative control) that has a partial match.)

I suppose it depends on what your definition of "real positive" is. Yes, in some senses finding something else in the sample that replicates is a real positive; it's still a false positive in the sense that it didn't find what the test was intended to look for.

We are talking 100 - 1,000 times more dilute, which alone requires over 7 - 10 additional rounds of PCR to account for.

Absolutely. Which ends up with over 7 - 10 additional rounds of PCR compared to a typical lab experiment, rather by definition. And in turn means that you have an additional 7-10 rounds of PCR affecting any inadvertent partial matches also.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +2 / -4
1
pseudosapient 1 point ago +1 / -0

And again, assumptions and attempted belittlement. I might suggest that you'd get a better response in general if you gave the same knowledge presented in a somewhat less belligerent manner.

and explain to people how these tests are “inaccurate”

I might suggest that you'd get a better response in general if you read what was written as opposed to what you assumed was said.

Kindly do not put words in other people's mouths.

it would take 7-10 additional rounds if not many more

Depends a lot on how exactly the dilution is done. As a counterexample: if you've got rare particles with enough in one particle to be detected after the full PCR process, then no. More dilution will decrease the chance of a particle being found in a test, and hence percentage of samples that are positive in that case, but won't increase the number of rounds required to be detected if a particle is present. (At least in the regime where the probability of more than one particle in a sample is relatively low.)

In an ideal world that would never happen - your sample prep and dilution would ensure that no such particles would be present - if only we lived in an ideal world.

160
BunnyPicnic 160 points ago +161 / -1

Most of the NPC's I know don't care what the tests actually say. Getting tested is the new I voted sticker... They are FAGGOTs

89
HeavyVetting 89 points ago +89 / -0

Gotta get tested for the deadly virus otherwise you'll never know you had it 🤡

38
deleted 38 points ago +38 / -0
13
HeavyVetting 13 points ago +13 / -0

But if there are too many cases we could achieve herd immunity and then the whole thing will be ruined!

3
Saltyminer11 3 points ago +3 / -0

They talk out if both sides of their asses.

9
Peashout 9 points ago +9 / -0

We lowered the capacity of hospitals to 15 people, to keep you safe.

Ahhhhhh!! Hospitals are at max capacity! We are so overwhelmed here guys!!

3
RegularAmerican 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yep it's nonsense. There's no overcrowded hospitals like they're claiming. They're only backed up because of all the procedural bullshit that's not even necessary

11
ViagraFalls 11 points ago +11 / -0

Dead people voting. Healthy people getting tested and finding they have the most deadly virus in history.

I bet people still aren't going to wake up after getting a vaccine that messes them up and finding that when you sue the company over it it's just going to a kangaroo court. These people are completely controlled.

6
603win 6 points ago +6 / -0

Nope, it’ll be a new democrat faction for identity politics to latch onto—the vaccine disabled. They’ll be “heroes” and it’ll be racist to suggest it’s the manufacturer’s fault.

5
ViagraFalls 5 points ago +5 / -0

If they die from it, they'll be new democrat voters too.

4
Juanye 4 points ago +4 / -0

None of those cases will see a court. They have liability protections

2
Saltyminer11 2 points ago +2 / -0

No credibility anywhere. Best thing that has happened. Control becomes less sustainable when trust is gone.

8
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 8 points ago +8 / -0

This is what should really wake people up. During the H1N1 pandemic they tested people because they were sick, and believe me, you fucking knew you were sick if you had H1N1. Yet during that pandemic there was no misleadia hype, no masks (in fact the CDC specifically advised against masks), no "social distancing", no quarantine, and no lockdowns to destroy the economy and collapse small businesses.

34
BillGateCanSuckIt 34 points ago +34 / -0

What you expect them to research, analyze, and make informed decisions?

Hey look, the McRib is back, better get in line and talk about those zingers your favorite team is throwing.

Lemmings going to lemming.

12
BunnyPicnic 12 points ago +12 / -0

I wish we could get them to drink cyanide kool aid. It wouldn't be hard. Just tell them it's aborted fetus blood that kills racism in white people.

4
SupremeDearLeader2 4 points ago +4 / -0

[ Hollywood/ DNC already do this ]

1
SwampPlumber 1 point ago +1 / -0

Follow the white rabbit

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
22
booblitchutz 22 points ago +22 / -0

Testing gets you virtue likes on failbook.

Testing positive gives you significant victim likes on failbook.

Having someone you love die with the coof gives you maximum victim likes on failbook.

I know a woman whose uncle died recently and he tested negative for the coof. She is pushing to have an autopsy because she doesn’t believe the negative coof test. She needs those internet points!

1
RustTrohle 1 point ago +1 / -0

Coof made me lol. Thank you.

6
Filo76 6 points ago +6 / -0

More like getting tested is the new wearing a mask. A mask is a magical placebo that protects you from the disease no matter what.

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
102
PilgrimFarAway 102 points ago +102 / -0

According to the inventor of PCR tests, the use of PCR tests to diagnose viral infection is completely fraudulent.

The abuse of PCR tests was started during the HIV scam. The inventor tried to stop its exploitation back then, but millions of dollars were involved and he failed. Now billions of dollars are at stake and they are using the same scam.

55
reckoningSE 55 points ago +55 / -0

it's a real shame that dude died in August 2019 and wasn't around to give interviews on the COVID pandemic and the testing methodology

50
Sumarongi 50 points ago +50 / -0

I believe he was murdered.

If he was around today he would have been screaming from the rooftops. No way they could let him be around

24
Mikey 24 points ago +24 / -0

He also directly came out and insulted Fauci by name. No way that he wasn't taken out.

7
InTheArmsOfThePepe 7 points ago +7 / -0

What was his name? I'd like to read up on it too

17
Sumarongi 17 points ago +17 / -0

Kary Mullis

5
InTheArmsOfThePepe 5 points ago +5 / -0

Thank you fren!

3
Bigger_igloo 3 points ago +3 / -0

If I remember right, a woman who was part of that team is speaking out against it now.

13
SaintMicheal 13 points ago +13 / -0

Did you ever see what he thought of one Anthony Fauci? You're gonna love it...

https://twitter.com/YellowCube7/status/1336972646613798913?s=20

1
BigCE 1 point ago +1 / -0

wow, so god damn relevant and he's not even talking about covid.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
coolguy4321 1 point ago +2 / -1

He also said this when only 1980s/early 1990s equipment was available. PCR used to be done using multiple water baths at different temperatures. This is like taking a quote from a surgeon in the 1920s saying heart transplants were impossible and using that as evidence to say heart transplants don't occur today.

1
PilgrimFarAway 1 point ago +1 / -0

OK, that's information I didn't have before. So, PCR tests are able to provide more granular information now? My response was premised upon information that I got from a tech in a food lab who runs certification tests for "HMO-Free" foods. He explains that PCR tests are of little value to him, because they do not quantify anything. They only indicate positive or negative. The only way to infer quantity is through multiple samples and try to draw an inference from the average number of cycles required to detect the subject DNA sequence. He explained that this is never done and is not considered scientifically valid. So, the most recent information that I have is that PCR tests do not quantify at all, only indicate presence or not.

Then, what I have heard, but I would love if you could educate me if I am incorrect, is that the current tests we run in the US are based upon a single strain of some corona virus, assumed to be COVID since the subject had recently travelled to China and came back with COVID-like symptoms. Further, I have been told, but maybe you know better, than PCR tests are using run with 22-28 cycles, and for some reason the US is running at close to 40 cycles.

Further, I have been told that the Supreme Court of Portugal recently determined that the error rate in PCR tests is much too high, with false positives of nearly 97% and determined that the detention of 4 German travelers was invalid. I have been told, that there is presently not a single published study showing a correlation between PCR test results and COVID related symptoms.

So, I stand by my previous comment and believe that the underlying science from the 80's still renders PCR tests useless for diagnosis of viral infections. Instead, PCR tests indicate the presence of at least one strand of the subject DNA sequence.

2
coolguy4321 2 points ago +2 / -0

PCR can definitely be used for quantification, this is usually referred to as qPCR (quantitative) or real-time PCR. PCR can be used in numerous different ways and its most routine forms are not quantitative, but appropriate controls and standards make quantification possible. A quick google scholar search for qPCR or quantitative PCR will bring up thousands of articles using it and a fair number describing how to do it properly, along with its caveats (every experimental system has limitations). I assume you mean GMO-free foods? PCR would indeed be a poor test for detecting all potential or uncharacterized GMOs, so maybe something got conflated there.

The cycle number really isn't a meaningful piece of information to grab onto unless you know exactly how the assay is being run. Are they using Taqman probes? What type of lightcycler/dye is being used? Are samples multiplexed? Frankly, people here flailing about cycle number may as well be shouting they have no experience with qPCR - its just not that simple. The stats for all the tests are easy to find online (specificity, sensitivity, etc) but it can be hard to figure out which one is being used for your sample in particular.

I don't know the details of the Portugal case, but this would be similar to throwing out the use of fingerprints because 1 court in Portugal found their technicians weren't using them appropriately. There are a huge number of reasons this may happen - if you have a link to a story I'd be happy to look at it.

The catch about diagnosing viral infections is that the test alone cannot tell you if the presence/absence of a piece of DNA is clinically relevant. This has to be paired with epidemiological data concerning the amount of virus expected to be in someone with an active infection or someone developing an infection. In the case of HIV, detecting any was very bad (there is no 'safe' level of HIV in the blood as they may be with other viruses), so the quote from the 80s is particularly wrong in its original context. Knowing how much virus is dangerous allows for qPCR to be used to diagnose viral infections.

Finally, Just because the person invented PCR doesn't mean he understands every possible use of it. This is like expecting the inventor of the internal combustion engine to know the top speed of a car 100 years after he is dead - hundreds of people just as smart as the inventor have put decades into improving these techniques.

1
PilgrimFarAway 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hey dude, I finally did some research on your quotes above. Thing is - it appears that the Covid tests commonly in use are not quantitative PCR tests. I see that LabCorp recently came out with a quantitative test, but I don't believe it has been approved.

Here is the case I mentioned about the Portugal Supreme Court ruling that the PCR test is unreliable and not a reasonable basis for forced quarantine: https://www.theportugalnews.com/news/2020-11-27/covid-pcr-test-reliability-doubtful-portugal-judges/56962

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
76
godutchnow 76 points ago +76 / -0

I'm a doctor. All tests have something called a sensitivity, ie. the % of true positives identified from all positives and specificity, ie. the % of true negatives identified from all negatives.

Let's say the sensitivity is 95% and the sensitivity is 99%, we'll first run 100000 tests in a population where 1/100 has the condition and one then one where 1/1000 has the condition

1000 have condition 99000 not, we find 950 TruPos, 50 FalseNeg and 98010 TruNeg and 990 FalseNeg

950/(990+950)=49% of Pos are TruPos and 98010/(98010+50)=99% of Neg are TruNeg

100 have condition and we find 95 TruPos and 5 FalseNeg and 98901 TruNeg and 999 FalsePos

95/(999+95)=8.6% of positives are TruPos and 98901/(98901+5)=99.99% of negatives are TruNeg

So the the positive predictive value ( TruePos/AllPos) is greatly dependent on the prevalence or chance before testing of having a certain condition.

So just testing everyone with no or minor symptoms leads to many false positives

39
RexCollumSilvarum 39 points ago +39 / -0

100 have condition and we find 95 TruPos and 5 FalseNeg and 98901 TruNeg and 999 FalsePos

This is the classic fallacy that everybody should understand before someone tries to trick you with it. So many people wrongly believe that if your test for some rare disease is positive, it means you definitely have the disease. Actually if the false positive rate is high enough, your odds of having it are still very low, as seen above.

14
thekindlyman555 14 points ago +14 / -0

And, even more insidiously, the false positive rate IS NOT A CONSTANT. Tests like this are designed to ensure the TRUE POSITIVE and TRUE NEGATIVE rates are at least a certain value, but the false positive and false negative rates are determined by the true positive/true negative specs as well as the proportion of positives and negatives in the population you're testing.

The more people in the population that you're testing have the virus, the higher your false negative rate and the lower your false positive rate, and vice versa.

Makes it very hard to determine what the false positive rate even is, because we do not have a fixed population breakdown from which we are testing.

3
GainesvilleFlorida 3 points ago +3 / -0

I really don’t understand this comment and the 3 above it.
I got tested for work. What does mean for me?

7
0561 7 points ago +7 / -0

It's so rushed and such BS.

If it's such a terrifying disease it would be double checked.

For example a patient tests positive for HIV with the western blot. You don't call them and be like hey good morning guess what you got HIV. It has to be confirmed with ELISA or whatever other test.

Same thing with drug testing. Preliminary has to be confirmed with GC/MS.

6
Muttsbitetoo 6 points ago +6 / -0

All Dr’e need to speak on this to stop the nonsense.

7
Callix 7 points ago +7 / -0

They’ll just take our licenses away

4
Watermelons 4 points ago +4 / -0

I've been saying this for 8 months. Check my only top level post.

52
Lapstrake 52 points ago +52 / -0

I think we are living through widespread and massive covid-19 fraud.

30
HeavyVetting 30 points ago +30 / -0

❗This claim about COVID-19 fraud is DISPOOTED

10
Filo76 10 points ago +10 / -0

DeeeeeeBOOOONKED.

9
BehindTheLines 9 points ago +9 / -0

ℹ️ Learn how COVID-1984 testing is safe and secure

7
Huginn 7 points ago +7 / -0

BY MULTIPLE SERCES

3
MAGA_100X 3 points ago +3 / -0

THEY TEEK ER JEBS!

2
ViagraFalls 2 points ago +2 / -0

The nation that let the perpetrators of 9/11 get away with it wouldn't do something like that. Are you crazy?

2
Lapstrake 2 points ago +2 / -0

Why are you calling me crazy?

2
ViagraFalls 2 points ago +2 / -0

curze I'mza cray-z

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
46
deleted 46 points ago +46 / -0
30
current_horror 30 points ago +30 / -0

Not only are deaths not going up, but we're on track to roughly match last year's total for all-cause mortality.

The vast majority of people "killed" by covid-19 in 2020 were overwhelmingly likely to die this year regardless, if by some other cause.

10
deleted 10 points ago +10 / -0
4
chambleepede 4 points ago +4 / -0

Ethical Skeptic on Twitter has all Ready shown this "pull forward" effect.

8
mainsoda 8 points ago +8 / -0

How can you have a pandemic when no additional people actually die?

4
Neil_Patrick_Covfefe 4 points ago +4 / -0

Hollywood magic!

1
4Godand4Country 1 point ago +1 / -0

pan·dem·ic /panˈdemik/ adjective (of a disease) prevalent over a whole country or the world.

13
Filo76 13 points ago +13 / -0

I’ve been seeing blips from the MSM that daily deaths have surpassed the number from earlier this spring.

I’m just assuming they are adding all normal flu deaths to the tally. It’s chicken little reporting at its finest.

10
deleted 10 points ago +10 / -0
6
tribeless 6 points ago +6 / -0

When you falsely claim 5% of the population has covid you also get to claim 5% of typical old age deaths.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
Filo76 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, something funky is going on.

Here are my states stats:

https://www.coronavirus.in.gov/2393.htm

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
chambleepede 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ga State data, with 14 day lag. Tests and so called cases spiking. Deaths... nah... dropping... and have been dropping for a while. See the official Ga tracking report. And show by date of onset or death...NOT date if report.

https://dph.georgia.gov/covid-19-daily-status-report

Things I would like answers to... but cannot find anywhwere...

... What is the IFR by age group for the flu? CDC has published for covid, and clearly if you're under 65 there is almost zero risk of death.

... In years past, have all deaths been tested for the flu? Because that may be skewing the numbers.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
chambleepede 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks. Yeah... you'd think they'd give a side-by-side. Also this has larger age groupings (18-49 vs their Covid numbers which are by decade up to 75 or 80)

38
SBDAmerican 38 points ago +39 / -1

This guy says up to 99% of the PCR tests are false positives. Not a typo. No doubt that Fauxvid-19 is not a big deal. Essentially the same as standards influenza

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=D1onx7LaNio

16
borscht-nazi 16 points ago +18 / -2

There is no "covid", nineteen or any other.

27
jaaardstyck 27 points ago +28 / -1

There may or may not be. There's always something floating around, this is for sure, but whatever is out there, we've discovered dozens of effective therapeutics, from HCQ to chicken soup. Hospitals have not been overrun, they've shut down 75% of their wings to focus solely on COVID and ended up cramming everybody into unimaginably tight spaces to make it LOOK like they're overrun. The majority of victims of this disease already had comorbidities and DNR's on their charts. The tests, as far as I can tell, are flipping results to positive like they were built by Dominion. And for this we shut down the world for 9 months, now with either an extremely difficult road to recovery or handing all business over to Amazon and China.

TL;DR there's probably a disease, but it's a glorified cold, and we done got had.

2
SaintMicheal 2 points ago +2 / -0

Unless we vaccinate against it, then maybe every common cold becomes deadly through pathogenic priming...

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
0
borscht-nazi 0 points ago +1 / -1

There is NO "covid-19". End of discussion. Beat it.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +4 / -6
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
8
NadlerShartWaddle 8 points ago +8 / -0

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2258702/

It was supposed to be deadlier, but made in China.

3
LazySusan 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yep, a bioweapon dud.

-1
borscht-nazi -1 points ago +0 / -1

So, you believe the nih.gov now? What's next, you're gonna quote fauci?

1
NadlerShartWaddle 1 point ago +1 / -0

That link is a study published in 2008 by the Wuhan Institute of Virology detailing their efforts to make a corona virus from a bat transferable to humans by splicing in parts of SARS and HIV and hosted at nih who funded the study iirc.

It's the most primary source possible regarding the creation of covid.

1
borscht-nazi 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh, so you believe the chicoms. Next you are gonna quote fauci and CNN. Got it.

6
Ched 6 points ago +6 / -0

Hence, the large proportion of asymptomatic patients.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
Ched 3 points ago +3 / -0

So true, and I hadn't thought of it this way before. Nobody says you have an asymptomatic TB infection. You have latent TB. I get that TB is not a virus, but the idea stands.

ultimately the whole thing is a socially engineered “crisis”.

It provided the mass hysteria necessary to steal an election.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
31
johndude 31 points ago +31 / -0

Large percentage of COVID tests ARE false positives, both by design and also by malevolence.

  • by design: so they don't miss true positives, they must have many false positives
  • by malevolence: excessive PCR cycles (basically doing 1. but too much)

The "by design" part is true for all kinds of medical tests. Because you don't want to miss any real positive, you necessarily overshoot and get a lot of false positives.

Surprisingly few people know it, but a "normal" accepted true/false positive rate for medical tests is around 10%. Meaning that if you test positive, your chances of being effectively positive are around 10%.

Does it mean that we should immediately divide the publicly available number of cases by 10? It does.

Does it mean that we should immediately divide the publicly available count of COVID deaths (defined as "dead after X weeks of being tested positive) by 10? It does.

Does it mean that COVID doesn't exist or is not a real concern? It doesn't.

5
theultimatesean 5 points ago +5 / -0

You had me until the last paragraph.

It should read: “Does it mean that COVID doesn’t exist or we should be treating it any different than a bad flu season? It doesn’t.”

6
johndude 6 points ago +6 / -0

Agreed, in the sense that a bad flu season would also be a real concern.

However covid is def. more violent for the ones who really got it. Some people I know got it months ago and haven't recovered their sense of smell yet. Some have had permanently damaged lungs. Some others have been fine since then.

Definitely more serious than flu.

Also just to mention, just because someone says COVID is a real problem doesn't mean he's a normie: COVID can exist and be a real thing, while having been created deliberately to be spread and apply the measures we see today.

3
theultimatesean 3 points ago +4 / -1

Your original comment lays out a case that it is NOT more serious than the flu.

The vast majority of those killed or severely impacted by Covid were due to hospital and medical malfeasance. Ventilators killed more than they saved. Restrictions on cheap OTC medicine turned non-threatening cases into serious ones. Lockdowns killed more people than they saved (except perhaps for the massive reduction in car fatalities.)

Another important point is that the flu kills people in all age groups. Covid kills people based on their expected morbidity. If anything, the children killed by the flu every year before now is a much more serious and impactful event, because it erases many more productive years of life even though fewer may actually die.

3
johndude 3 points ago +3 / -0

Can't disagree with you

3
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 3 points ago +3 / -0

I've had colds that have impacted my sense of smell for months, and any case of pneumonia in itself can have complications that cause permanent lung damage.

1
coolguy4321 1 point ago +1 / -0

I think the next-worst flu season in the last decade was 60k dead, so even in this scenario its a nightmarish flu-season that persists year-round

3
LesboPregnancyScare 3 points ago +3 / -0

The PCR positive tests would be like detecting you have a penny and are therefore classified as a millionaire.

27
Beat_to_Quarters 27 points ago +27 / -0

Coworker's wife had two people test positive where she worked, and the state automatically recorded that 15 other people were positive even though they either were negative or werent tested. "Two positive? Okay so 15 positive."

14
Whirlybot 14 points ago +14 / -0

And people who test positive and go through the quarantine, keep retesting to determine when they are 'free' from the virus. Every positive they get is another positive lumped into the country/state totals, falsely inflating the numbers.

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
3
ViagraFalls 3 points ago +3 / -0

I learnified dat kinder maff frum common core.

2
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yes, they do the same thing here in Oregon. A single case results in 20 "presumptive cases". Gotta pump up those numbers!

27
Homopratensis2 27 points ago +27 / -0

This has been obvious for a while.

25
JirkaBedr 25 points ago +25 / -0

The tests are positive. But it didn't mean what they are saying. Any virus going through the population (especially for the first time) would have similar numbers.

The fact is that there ARE NOT more death in 2020 than in previous years.

The usual causes have been "replaced" by COVID.....

What a coincidence.

9
Genericwhitemale 9 points ago +9 / -0

Can’t you just be happy that covid cured cancer and many other diseases?!

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
JirkaBedr 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yep... Add a 98% decline in influenza .....

It's a miracle......

18
realPhantomFuck 18 points ago +19 / -1

I'm forced by my employer to receive a nasal lobotomy every Monday...

This company is 700 people and has hundreds of contractors/construction workers visiting each month at our buildings

Not ONE positive test since March and this is in the Bay Area. Shit doesn't exist

4
holland404 4 points ago +4 / -0

"Nasal lobotomy" I have been telling people this from the start! If it hurts so much to get the test, what damage are they doing? I also wonder about the lost of taste and smell, is this only occurring in people that got the nasal lobotomy and then test positive? Is that from illness of from frontal lobe damage? I would let em probe my anus before i ever let them probe my frontal lobe! (just kidding! They can stay the fuck away from me with their invasive probes and pricks!!) Also, what else can be done with that swab they take away? DNA testing, cataloging. No thanks! Nice try tho!

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
14
IsrorOrca 14 points ago +14 / -0

Well seeing as how every week we’re told x number of NFL players tested positive and an hour before game time it’s “lol j/k false positives, the entire lot.”

6
IvIA6A 6 points ago +6 / -0

Some were taking 4 or more tests and half come back false positive. It's all deliberate

13
Voiceofreason72 13 points ago +14 / -1

Both the FDA and the CDC have admitted on their own sites that the antigen tests are totally flawed and we know the pcr tests are worthless. Fauci (I have the vid) states clearly that pcr results after 35 cycles are totally unusable. The standard is 40 cycles in the US. The tests are garbage, there is no pandemic.

13
AngryAsian 13 points ago +14 / -1

Considering a can of Coke just tested positive, yes

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
13
WhiteTrashJesus 13 points ago +14 / -1

My goat and papaya say 90%

10
TrumpAndGodWin 10 points ago +10 / -0

Alex said that the president/scientist (of Tanzania?) sent many other random things and they came back positive. And someone else tested a Coke and it tested positive. Sad!

3
Jjabrams 3 points ago +3 / -0

And that was back in April !!!!

11
PedeChess 11 points ago +11 / -0

Bayes’ Theorem. If you have COVID tests that give a false positive 2% of the time and you administer 300 million tests (I’ve been tested 4 times), that’s 6 million positive tests. Every positive test is counted as a case.

Candace Owens says it well.

https://twitter.com/RealCandaceO/status/1259631071831957505?s=20

7
IvIA6A 7 points ago +7 / -0

These hospitals all get money, so yeah you're going to list anything and everything as covid. And if a few administrators have to fudge some paperwork, who cares.

10
operatorstorm712 10 points ago +10 / -0

How many have thought, since the first month of "flatten the curve" that this whole things was a bloody filthy con? Me!

10
FetalTransition 10 points ago +10 / -0

Every single one of us.

4
MAGAlikethis 4 points ago +4 / -0

Liberals got tired of us always using "the facts" against them. For years, all they heard from us was "the facts, the facts, the facts..."

So they decided to fudge the numbers. They decided to manipulate tests, manipulate votes, manipulate any data they could get their hands on so they could try to take away the power of "the facts" that they heard about for so many years.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
10
naahbruh 10 points ago +10 / -0

I’m too lazy to archive this article because I’m shitting and I’m using a phone, but fuel for your question... Start of nfl training camp, 77 players tested positive for covid, all were false positives. There’s a wapo article floating out there with the deets

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
10
SkullE 10 points ago +11 / -1

No proof but i'd guess over 70%

8
EIEIO 8 points ago +8 / -0

The governor of Pennsylvania just announced he had covid and the next day said he tested negative then negative again. His excuse was they must have caught it at the end of the disease. POS

8
deleted 8 points ago +10 / -2
7
Tseliteiv 7 points ago +7 / -0

My anecdotal experience is the same. I know tons of people who've been tested regularly. All have been negative. Only time anyone has ever tested positive is when they were truly sick.

That to me indicates normal false positive rates. Maybe a little higher than normal. That means there's still large amounts of false positives. What I'm curious about is if the test mistakes others viruses for covid-19 as well. It doesn't seem likely that flu just disappeared because of covid. It also doesn't seem likely that regular cold disappeared either. I'm wondering if the tests are catching those viruses.

The real issue with the testing isn't necessarily the tests themselves but with recording the tests. There have been numerous reports of places double counting. The recording of covid-19 positives is as fictitious as Biden votes.

5
Callix 5 points ago +5 / -0

The common cold is a covid virus. So the covid-19 test will also pop positive if someone has the common cold.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
3
Liberty4All 3 points ago +3 / -0

The CDC's own website admits that the COVID test can return positive for persons infected with other coronaviruses - which make up about 30% of colds.

Conisidering how prevalent colds are, it's a certain that many people who simply have a cold are being told they have COVID and quarantined, losing wages, causing businesses to close, etc.

What we can't know is how much of this fall's spike in "COVID cases" - which is occurring everywhere regardless of mask mandates and lockdowns - is due to the common cold.

2
deleted 2 points ago +4 / -2
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
3
Huginn 3 points ago +3 / -0

I've had five co-workers come up positive, only one had symptoms. He basically had the flu.

2
deleted 2 points ago +4 / -2
2
Lordahdaring 2 points ago +2 / -0

I work in IT but at Texas Medical Center, TMC does a great job of not being full of crap.

Perhaps your facility is not full of crap?

1
zee_bear 1 point ago +1 / -0

I work with a California company and we had to stop work for a few days after someone tested positive. I don’t know who the person was but apparently he or she had mild symptoms. There are only 20 people in the company - and I couldn’t tell who it was. The mild symptoms were probably fatigue or headaches . Since the person tested positive, we all got tested and I think 2 more tested positive. No symptoms.

2
Liberty4All 2 points ago +2 / -0

And this is a perfect example of the unnecessary fear and economic damage being inflicted across the country every day.

1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
2
ChilledCovfefe 2 points ago +2 / -0

Vitamin d zinc and quercetin are preventatives. Vitamin d deficiency is one of the key indicators for having to go to the hospital. It’s like 85% of cases

1
HeavyVetting 1 point ago +1 / -0

I imagine the "regular" testing may be more accurate but the random paranoid people getting tested is where they pump up their numbers like the democrat counties did with votes.

8
Qbaby 8 points ago +8 / -0

Yep. I refuse to give away my DNA or to be infected on purpose.

It's a plandemic, a hoax.

7
RexButt1776 7 points ago +7 / -0

Whether positive or not. The metric they’re using to enforce lock downs are “cases”

That’s usually defined as “any person testing positive + anyone that person has come in close contact with” or “an inconclusive test + anyone that person has come in close contact with”

7
Michigirl 7 points ago +7 / -0

A nurse friend told me that every positive test counts a new case. So if someone tested positive three times, it's counted as three different cases. At her work, if they get it (she and her family did get mild flu symptoms and positive tests) they have to have two negative tests to come back to work. So all those tests add up.

7
TruthSeeker60 7 points ago +7 / -0

When an Austrian politician performs a Covid test live on TV on a glass of coca cola and it comes up positive, then you know these tests are BS!

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
7
ILikeMyBlueCar 7 points ago +7 / -0

It’s more than likely a disgustingly huge percentage. As soon as I heard what testing they were using, I knew we’d see bogus outrageous numbers. I’ve been calling a majority of this shit to my friends and family before it happens and most of them still refuse to acknowledge that they were played hard and raw.

6
borscht-nazi 6 points ago +9 / -3

There is no "covid"

4
Genericwhitemale 4 points ago +4 / -0

It’s the regular flu rebranded.

change my mind

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
borscht-nazi 0 points ago +1 / -1

I like this theory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGGd7-vvd9Y

But regardless, it's a psyop, not an RNA virus, as they claim. A psych virus -- yes.

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
5
Lordahdaring 5 points ago +5 / -0

CDC said up to 90% were false positive... including deaths.

5
Robert 5 points ago +5 / -0

The virus could literally not exist but as long as you tested enough people with a 50% false positive rate, tens of millions, it would legitimately look like half the country was dying from something that literally doesn't exist.

5
JakeItToTheLimit 5 points ago +5 / -0

My sister knows 2 people who went and "checked in" for testing, line was too long, so they left.

They received positive test results in the mail a few days later...

5
brentclip 5 points ago +5 / -0

I have anecdotal evidence from at least 5 people who never got the test (only waited in line and finally left because line was too long) who all tested positive.

4
JoePCool14 4 points ago +4 / -0

I do. I think every single number is fake.

4
mostlyatnight 4 points ago +4 / -0

Has t it been this whole time? Remember Super Tuesday? When they store the bid from Bernie. Pretty much doing exactly what they’re trying to do to trump. Once the truth starts coming out all of the sudden second lock downs. They’re are Definitely trying. Doesn’t seem to be working as well this time.

4
findthewarmspot 4 points ago +4 / -0

It’s obvious if a fucking glass of cola and a pineapple can test positive.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
1
88ii 1 point ago +1 / -0

Know that all flu numbers are ESTIMATES, not counts. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2019-2020.html

Only 14 states are part of FluServ https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/influenza-hospitalization-surveillance.htm

The following CDC article says "Due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, this system will suspend data collection for the 2020-21 influenza season. Data from previous seasons are available on FluView Interactive."

https://www.technocracy.news/cdc-will-map-covid-19-but-suspends-tracking-of-influenza/

The CDC's story changes by the day and they are no different than the FBI or DOJ--not to be trusted without very deep research and vetting--a full time job (with zero pay) which most of us cannot fit into our day. Don't listen to their BS.

https://i.maga.host/9kpbb1P.png

3
fancysquirrelq 3 points ago +3 / -0

Ding ding ding ding 🛎 We have a winner folks!

3
Sansa_Belt 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yeah, I read a quote where Mullis said that the PCR test that he developed (invented) is essentially useless when applied as a method for testing for the presence of the CCP Coronavirus-19. The commercial esting centers have set the cycle count too high, making the sensitivity of the test completely unreliable at detecting viral presence or load. Like a leaf falling on your car's bumper would set off your airbags unreliable.

First off, a positive test even were it really positive in the sense that an active infection is present does not mean that the person is contagious or even ill. And that actually repeated testing will pick up enough viral particles to eventually produce a false positive test. The person could have unknowingly been infected dozens of weeks ago and dead viral fragments cause a positive result. It's all a colossal fraud.

The nature of the test itself is suspect and not to be trusted according to the man who developed it; Kary Mullis. He said that owing to the "sensitivity cycles" done during the specimen's evaluation it's far too sensitive to provide a worthwhile conclusion. Again this is the inventor of the test, who also has some choice words about the technical talents of the vaunted Dr, Fauci.

This frickin' con has destroyed much of our economy and many lives, particularly of small busniess owners. While the big box stores and online sellers like Amazon flourish. All in a bid to effect an election, an ends to a means. Criminal.

3
ironhorse 3 points ago +3 / -0

I believe more than half of the positive rate is due to incompetent medical care workers....I mean HEROS.

1
Jjabrams 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thr 250k covid deaths this year are really the 250k medical mistake deaths we see on average on any given year rebranded. Change my mind.

3
TrumpAwakens2020 3 points ago +3 / -0

The PCR test will return positive for ANY coronavirus. Literally the common cold. So if you have any bit of common cold virus floating around, and if the maginfication is set high enough, it'll almost always return a positive result. The TestDemic is a complete fucking scam to fuck over the world.

3
deleted 3 points ago +7 / -4
3
bdog 3 points ago +3 / -0

The true false positive rate (FPR) is at least between 2-7%, as that is the range from meta studies of previous PCR-test external quality assessments (EQAs)

Considering that the pandemic situation results in a massive requirement for testing personnel, necessarily with less experience, the performance quality of procedures will be much worse than normal. Most false positives are typically explained to be caused by cross-contamination during testing/sampling and sample processing.

I would expect the FPR to be about double what is shown in normal EQAs, so 4-14%.

Note that the FPR-rate found during licencing test procedures use optimal lab conditions, experienced personnel, no shared use of any bottle or tool or lab personnel between subsequent tests, etc. And they avoid the patient-sample/shipment process all together, using only prepared samples. This is how they get 100% specificity (0% FPR) in the licensing document. But it is not at all representative of CLINICAL FPR.

https://forums.lockdownsceptics.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=961

3
DeusVult2020 3 points ago +3 / -0

So obvious it hurts

3
KurtTingles 3 points ago +3 / -0

Had FDA bureaucratic bullshit not blocked HCQ for out-patient care earlier in the year Kung Flu would have been a footnote in next year's history book editions. Makes my blood boil at the thought of how many lives could have been saved.

https://aapsonline.org/fda-bureaucrat-brags-he-blocked-physician-prescribing-of-hydroxychloroquine-in-early-covid-19/