5192
Wait, so the infection rate is off by an order of 10? Always has been. (media.patriots.win)
posted ago by TheJustin ago by TheJustin +5195 / -3
165 comments
165 comments share save hide report block hide child comments
Comments (165)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
▲ 59 ▼
– War_Hamster 59 points ago +59 / -0

This information was out there last Spring, but they deliberately chose not to listen.

My Lefty Sister, an actual medical doctor, just weeks ago tried to tell me that there was no such thing as a False Positive PCR test.

Having done consulting work for a saliva testing company, I am very familiar with the fact that 99.8% accuracy is considered the very rare gold standard in testing. There are ALWAYS false positives.

permalink save report block reply
▲ 33 ▼
– TrudopesEyebrow 33 points ago +33 / -0

Send your sister this: https://i.maga.host/WmD5lre.png. It’s data from: https://dawsoncountyjournal.com/blog/2021/01/04/fda-admits-pcr-tests-give-false-results-prepares-ground-for-biden-to-crush-casedemic/

Facts and takeaways:

  1. An appeals court in Portugal has ruled that the PCR process is not a reliable test for Sars-Cov-2, and therefore any enforced quarantine based on those test results is unlawful.
  2. A new study from the Infectious Diseases Society of America, found that at 25 cycles of amplification, 70% of PCR test “positives” are not “cases” since the virus cannot be cultured, it’s dead. And by 35 cycles: 97% of the positives are non-clinical.
  3. 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 cycles, 70% of the positive results are not really “positives” in any clinical sense, since it cannot make you or anyone else sick
permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 11 ▼
– Workhorse101 11 points ago +12 / -1

The PCR test shouldn't even be used for this purpose. I can't remember all the technical details however I do remember reading the PCR test is not intended for finding a virus.

Just like it wasn't intended for finding if someone was HIV postive back during the other major fake pandemic.

Pretty sure I've also seen a video of the inventor of the test saying the same thing in regard to HIV.

A quick search and here's one of many articles talking about the PCR test being misused.

https://truth11.com/2020/12/25/the-pcr-test-does-not-detect-an-actual-virus/

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 5 ▼
– SnakeEyeMitch 5 points ago +5 / -0

The PCR test shouldn't even be used for this purpose. I can't remember all the technical details however I do remember reading the PCR test is not intended for finding a virus.

The creator of PCR said as much.

permalink parent save report block reply