Arbitrary Cycle Threshold Values were known to be a problem. This reads like something I would have written. So the question is: Who is behind the fraudulent use of arbitrary Ct values?
Thank you for continuing to push this. I pushed this point myself with school board and local county board of supervisors too, in order to try to get the local health bureaucrats to stop pushing for track, PCR tag and quarantine and for school closings. More evidence is always helpful. Thanks for all you are doing.
Notice the date on it, Dec. 7--well before the world was notified of the “outbreak,” and even before the “vaccine” transfer of material documentation, Dec. 12, which is also suspiciously before the “outbreak.”
The truly crucifying thing is that they knew what the Cycle Thresholds were and intentionally ignored it. The PCR cycle thresholds were well known for over two decades in courts as part of their DNA evidence protocol. Try submitting DNA evidence to a court with a CT of 40+
In Canada it is 25. Anyone know what it is in the USA? UK? Any other country that has it in their courts?
Please share your encouragement for the new CHD documentary--The Real Anthony Fauci. It is so important that all of us get behind this very important information that "OUTS Anthony Fauci!" We must stand together and behind this effort. In this way we move greater numbers forward.
In June of 2021 I coded a False Positive Rate calculator. Anyone who has worked in Test and Measurement should understand that testing under low prevalence conditions will have to comply with Bayes rule to calculate such.
What amazed me is that the BMJ had a similar tool but used a doctor's confidence in their diagnoses of a patient being Covid infected rather than prevalence (or positivity rate). This is what I would call a very unscientific positive feedback mechanism that makes a False Positive result dependant on a doctors confidence that it is not a False Positive. Mind boggling.
Note: the above tool does not play well on mobile phones.
Thank you for continuing to push this. I pushed this point myself with school board and local county board of supervisors too, in order to try to get the local health bureaucrats to stop pushing for track, PCR tag and quarantine and for school closings. More evidence is always helpful. Thanks for all you are doing.
Notice the date on it, Dec. 7--well before the world was notified of the “outbreak,” and even before the “vaccine” transfer of material documentation, Dec. 12, which is also suspiciously before the “outbreak.”
The truly crucifying thing is that they knew what the Cycle Thresholds were and intentionally ignored it. The PCR cycle thresholds were well known for over two decades in courts as part of their DNA evidence protocol. Try submitting DNA evidence to a court with a CT of 40+
In Canada it is 25. Anyone know what it is in the USA? UK? Any other country that has it in their courts?
Please share your encouragement for the new CHD documentary--The Real Anthony Fauci. It is so important that all of us get behind this very important information that "OUTS Anthony Fauci!" We must stand together and behind this effort. In this way we move greater numbers forward.
In June of 2021 I coded a False Positive Rate calculator. Anyone who has worked in Test and Measurement should understand that testing under low prevalence conditions will have to comply with Bayes rule to calculate such.
https://hotbeer.com.au/pcr-false-positive-calculator.php
What amazed me is that the BMJ had a similar tool but used a doctor's confidence in their diagnoses of a patient being Covid infected rather than prevalence (or positivity rate). This is what I would call a very unscientific positive feedback mechanism that makes a False Positive result dependant on a doctors confidence that it is not a False Positive. Mind boggling.
Note: the above tool does not play well on mobile phones.
why were private labs unable to provide cycle counts?
Christian Drosten?
How about the non-PCR antigen tests? Are they same, more, or less reliable?