CDC, FDA faked covid test protocol using common cold

[CrowCross]

CDC, FDA faked covid test protocol using common cold

It's true. The truth about PCR swab up your nose Covid -19 test.

They have even admitted it. Go to the 13:10 minute mark and start listening there.

Also go to the FDA Gov site...and do a search for the word "isolates"if you want to see the document.
The admittance in written in geeky terms...but the video explains it.

Here's what it says.

The analytical sensitivity of the rRT-PCR assays contained in the CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019- nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel were determined in Limit of Detection studies. Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen. Samples were extracted using the QIAGEN EZ1 Advanced XL instrument and EZ1 DSP Virus Kit (Cat# 62724) and manually with the QIAGEN DSP Viral RNA Mini Kit (Cat# 61904). Real-Time RT-PCR assays were performed using the Thermo Fisher Scientific TaqPath™ 1-Step RT-qPCR Master Mix, CG (Cat# A15299) on the Applied Biosystems™ 7500 Fast Dx RealTime PCR Instrument according to the CDC 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel instructions for use.

It'll be interesting to see what the "fact checkers" say.

 

[Whateverman]

The analytical sensitivity of the rRT-PCR assays contained in the CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019- nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel were determined in Limit of Detection studies. Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen. Samples were extracted using the QIAGEN EZ1 Advanced XL instrument and EZ1 DSP Virus Kit (Cat# 62724) and manually with the QIAGEN DSP Viral RNA Mini Kit (Cat# 61904). Real-Time RT-PCR assays were performed using the Thermo Fisher Scientific TaqPath™ 1-Step RT-qPCR Master Mix, CG (Cat# A15299) on the Applied Biosystems™ 7500 Fast Dx RealTime PCR Instrument according to the CDC 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel instructions for use.

Tell us what this means in your own words.

 

[Bonnie]

CDC, FDA faked covid test protocol using common cold

It's true. The truth about PCR swab up your nose Covid -19 test.

They have even admitted it. Go to the 13:10 minute mark and start listening there.

Also go to the FDA Gov site...and do a search for the word "isolates" if you want to see the document.
The admittance in written in geeky terms...but the video explains it.

Here's what it says.

The analytical sensitivity of the rRT-PCR assays contained in the CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019- nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel were determined in Limit of Detection studies. Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen. Samples were extracted using the QIAGEN EZ1 Advanced XL instrument and EZ1 DSP Virus Kit (Cat# 62724) and manually with the QIAGEN DSP Viral RNA Mini Kit (Cat# 61904). Real-Time RT-PCR assays were performed using the Thermo Fisher Scientific TaqPath™ 1-Step RT-qPCR Master Mix, CG (Cat# A15299) on the Applied Biosystems™ 7500 Fast Dx RealTime PCR Instrument according to the CDC 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel instructions for use.

It'll be interesting to see what the "fact checkers" say.

Did you not read the part I bolded? Please do so, and do so, carefully.

 

[CrowCross]

Did you not read the part I bolded? Please do so, and do so, carefully.

I was required to take a covid test to participate in something....whatI feared the most was a false positive.

 

[CrowCross]

Tell us what this means in your own words.

PCR test have big problems...they don't test for the corona virus.

 

[Furion]

Did you not read the part I bolded? Please do so, and do so, carefully.

Tell us what it means in your own words.

 

[Whateverman]

PCR test have big problems...they don't test for the corona virus.

That's not a translation of the text you posted, no.

You're free to say whatever you want here (within the limits of CARM's ruleset), but please stop pretending you understand the scientific stuff you try to post. You clearly do not.

 

[vibise]

CDC, FDA faked covid test protocol using common cold

It's true. The truth about PCR swab up your nose Covid -19 test.

They have even admitted it. Go to the 13:10 minute mark and start listening there.

Also go to the FDA Gov site...and do a search for the word "isolates"if you want to see the document.
The admittance in written in geeky terms...but the video explains it.

Here's what it says.

The analytical sensitivity of the rRT-PCR assays contained in the CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019- nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel were determined in Limit of Detection studies. Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen. Samples were extracted using the QIAGEN EZ1 Advanced XL instrument and EZ1 DSP Virus Kit (Cat# 62724) and manually with the QIAGEN DSP Viral RNA Mini Kit (Cat# 61904). Real-Time RT-PCR assays were performed using the Thermo Fisher Scientific TaqPath™ 1-Step RT-qPCR Master Mix, CG (Cat# A15299) on the Applied Biosystems™ 7500 Fast Dx RealTime PCR Instrument according to the CDC 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel instructions for use.

It'll be interesting to see what the "fact checkers" say.

I do not see the problem with this. In place of virus isolates, they generated RNA from the sequenced covid DNA, and made dilutions of that to test for the limits of detection using real-time RT-PCR, which is a PCR test regularly used for quantitation. They provide details of the assay parameters.

This is the sequence they used, which is the original covid-19 isolate from Wuhan, although it was not named as such when it was first sequenced:

Wuhan seafood market pneumonia virus isolate Wuhan-Hu-1, complete geno - Nucleotide - NCBI

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[CrowCross]

Here's more....
FDA document admits that the CDC and FDA conspired to fabricate a covid-19 testing protocol using human cells combined with common cold virus fragments because they had no physical samples of the SARS-CoV-2 “covid” virus available.
Without physical reference material to use for calibration and confirmation, the test has zero scientific basis in physical reality. And all the PCR analysis based on this protocol is utterly fraudulent, flagging people as “positive” for covid when they merely possess tiny quantities of RNA fragments from other coronavirus strains circulating in their blood.

 

[CrowCross]

I do not see the problem with this. In place of virus isolates, they generated RNA from the sequenced covid DNA, and made dilutions of that to test for the limits of detection using real-time RT-PCR, which is a PCR test regularly used for quantitation. They provide details of the assay parameters.

This is the sequence they used, which is the original covid-19 isolate from Wuhan, although it was not named as such when it was first sequenced:

Wuhan seafood market pneumonia virus isolate Wuhan-Hu-1, complete geno - Nucleotide - NCBI

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

That's not the issue. The PCR test were not calibrated....Read my links, listen to the video.

 

[Whateverman]

The PCR test were not calibrated....Read my links, listen to the video.

Abject nonsense.

Any scientist who wants to remain a working scientist will be sure that his/her equipment is calibrated. To not do this renders every result from that equipment suspect. It'd be a massive waste of time and resources.

Stop pretending you understand the science you're posting Brighteon videos about.

 

[vibise]

Here's more....
FDA document admits that the CDC and FDA conspired to fabricate a covid-19 testing protocol using human cells combined with common cold virus fragments because they had no physical samples of the SARS-CoV-2 “covid” virus available.
Without physical reference material to use for calibration and confirmation, the test has zero scientific basis in physical reality. And all the PCR analysis based on this protocol is utterly fraudulent, flagging people as “positive” for covid when they merely possess tiny quantities of RNA fragments from other coronavirus strains circulating in their blood.

The quote you included said nothing about a common cold virus. The sequence that was used was the first covid-19 virus. I provided a link to its GenBank sequence entry, using the accession number you provided.
If they had had actual virus, they would have used the same quantitative PCR method to determine the limits of detection.
DNA actually counts as physical reference material, especially because what is being tested for is detectable viral nucleic acid.
This is not a fraudulent assay except in the minds of conspiracy theorists with no actual formal scientific knowledge or experience.

 

[CrowCross]

And yet another article:
They’re saying the PCR technology will continue to be used, but they’re replacing what the test is looking FOR with a better “reference sample.” A better marker. A better target. A better piece of RNA supposedly derived from SARS-CoV-2.

CDC/FDA are confessing there has been a PROBLEM with the PCR test which has been used to detect the virus, starting in February of 2020—-right up to this minute.

In other words, the millions and millions of “COVID cases” based on the PCR test in use are all suspect.

Continue to article

 

[CrowCross]

Abject nonsense.

Any scientist who wants to remain a working scientist will be sure that his/her equipment is calibrated.

What did they calibrate it with?

Answer...human cells and a cold virus. Didn't you read the article?

 

[vibise]

That's not the issue. The PCR test were not calibrated....Read my links, listen to the video.

It was most definitely calibrated using appropriate dilutions of covid-19 nucleic acid.

I do not click on unidentified links. I have been burned too often, and just had to have my OS reinstalled a few weeks ago because I got a virus from a sketchy link.

 

[CrowCross]

The quote you included said nothing about a common cold virus. The sequence that was used was the first covid-19 virus. I provided a link to its GenBank sequence entry, using the accession number you provided.
If they had had actual virus, they would have used the same quantitative PCR method to determine the limits of detection.
DNA actually counts as physical reference material, especially because what is being tested for is detectable viral nucleic acid.
This is not a fraudulent assay except in the minds of conspiracy theorists with no actual formal scientific knowledge or experience.

Did you know that the guy who developed the test said...It can't be used for determine if you have the virus?

And we haven't even discussed over cycling.

 

[CrowCross]

It was most definitely calibrated using appropriate dilutions of covid-19 nucleic acid.

Sure it was.

I do not click on unidentified links. I have been burned too often, and just had to have my OS reinstalled a few weeks ago because I got a virus from a sketchy link.

Each link was identified..with a portion from the link presented.

I noticed you had no problem presenting a link.

 

[vibise]

What did they calibrate it with?

Answer...human cells and a cold virus. Didn't you read the article?

Where are you getting the idea that this was a cold virus?

The viral sequence used was named in your OP. I did a BLASTn search (nucleotide search of the entire sequence database), and all of the hits were to covid-19 sequences:

BLAST: Basic Local Alignment Search Tool

The Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST) finds regions of local similarity between sequences. The program compares nucleotide or protein sequences to sequence databases and calculates the statistical significance of matches. BLAST can be used to infer functional and evolutionary...

blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The claim that this is somehow an unrelated cold virus is wrong.

 

[vibise]

Did you know that the guy who developed the test said...It can't be used for determine if you have the virus?

And we haven't even discussed over cycling.

The guy who developed the test was dead and gone before covid-19 appeared.

Yes, PCR can be used to determine if people are infected with this or other viruses, but the PCR test can be done incorrectly, which is certainly the case with just about any testing procedure.

 

[Whateverman]

What did they calibrate it with?

Answer...human cells and a cold virus. Didn't you read the article?

I did, and when you want to detect a specific thing, part of the calibration process involves testing the equipment against a known quantity of the thing you're trying to detect in an unknown sample.

That's what calibration means, and how calibration is done.

You're fundamentally ignorant of the thing you want to have strong opinions about.