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?
You're getting the point, yes. Efficacy. Safety. Masks. Isolation. Anything studied w/Diagnosis rates based on PCR w/arbitrary Ct values is bullshit. All of it. Wait until to see the sheer amount of granular data from Dr. Lee. Hope that paper can be published soon, but it may not be until next week.
Lets also remember that they used these BS dodgy PCR tests as circular logic "proving", dubiously, all other alleged isolates. A circle-jerk of smoke and mirrors.
Huh. I've heard that suggested before. Imagine if they didn't even actually have an infectious isolate to base the genetic assay markers on. Oh and suppose they said, darn these tests aren't finding enough asymptomatic people who are surely going to die once we are lucky enough to get them in the hospital and collect our CARES Bounties so lets limit the specificity to only 1 of the 3 gene targets, never-mind needing that human control maker, pool them at tens to 100 at a time and THAT will make sure the meek are willing to fight their clear thinking freedom advocating alert neighbors to demand the most dangerous biologic product be mandated to be injected in every person on the planet.
I was on the school board for my kids' school and did the same. I might as well have been speaking another language. The policies were RIDICULOUS and I assume still are. I don't know though because I withdrew my children and resigned from the board.
Sigh.
Echoing your gratitude to all of those that are doing the legwork for justice...
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?
Even Fausti said that "If it's over 35 it's probably just a viral fragment" ... So why are we measuring well beyond that? FRAUD.
The numbers are quite telling. Take a calculator and go 2 Y^X 20 (2 to the 20th) and you get about 1 million so at 20 cycles you've grown about 1 million times more biological material than you started with. 25 is 32 million. 30 is over a billion. 35 is 32 billion. 40 is 1 trillion. AFAIK anything over 35 is FRAUD.
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.
You're getting the point, yes. Efficacy. Safety. Masks. Isolation. Anything studied w/Diagnosis rates based on PCR w/arbitrary Ct values is bullshit. All of it. Wait until to see the sheer amount of granular data from Dr. Lee. Hope that paper can be published soon, but it may not be until next week.
This time we have data.
Can you share the data?
Check back at 9AM today.
Lets also remember that they used these BS dodgy PCR tests as circular logic "proving", dubiously, all other alleged isolates. A circle-jerk of smoke and mirrors.
Huh. I've heard that suggested before. Imagine if they didn't even actually have an infectious isolate to base the genetic assay markers on. Oh and suppose they said, darn these tests aren't finding enough asymptomatic people who are surely going to die once we are lucky enough to get them in the hospital and collect our CARES Bounties so lets limit the specificity to only 1 of the 3 gene targets, never-mind needing that human control maker, pool them at tens to 100 at a time and THAT will make sure the meek are willing to fight their clear thinking freedom advocating alert neighbors to demand the most dangerous biologic product be mandated to be injected in every person on the planet.
I was on the school board for my kids' school and did the same. I might as well have been speaking another language. The policies were RIDICULOUS and I assume still are. I don't know though because I withdrew my children and resigned from the board.
Sigh.
Echoing your gratitude to all of those that are doing the legwork for justice...
Sarah, you sound like an awesome human being and parent. Two thumbs up to you!
Mark Twain was right.
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?
CT 38 is OFF THE PAGE OF % chance of replication positivity.
Even Fausti said that "If it's over 35 it's probably just a viral fragment" ... So why are we measuring well beyond that? FRAUD.
The numbers are quite telling. Take a calculator and go 2 Y^X 20 (2 to the 20th) and you get about 1 million so at 20 cycles you've grown about 1 million times more biological material than you started with. 25 is 32 million. 30 is over a billion. 35 is 32 billion. 40 is 1 trillion. AFAIK anything over 35 is FRAUD.
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?