CDC, FDA faked covid test protocol using common cold

Storch

Member
The spike proteins that travel through out your blood THAT KILLS PEOPLE...and you people want me to take that jab?

You try to shame me into it?
With a survival rate of 99.whatever%, we still have people trying to shame other people into taking an experimental injection that does not even confer immunity to get that extra .5% protection. That's called hysteria. I don't think they really hear themselves anymore.

I wonder how they're dealing with the fact that the spike protein is damaging on its own without the virus? My guess is that they're not even going to look into it because their cognitive dissonance demands it.
 
Last edited:

vibise

Well-known member
The spike proteins that travel through out your blood THAT KILLS PEOPLE...and you people want me to take that jab?

You try to shame me into it?
If that were the case, I would be dead or seriously ill along with the billions that have been vaccinated.

And yet that has not happened.

Your explanation is....?
 

vibise

Well-known member
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

PCR does not distinguish between infectious virus and non-infectious nucleic acid
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Let's start here. Do you agree with the above statement?
Yes. But it identifies whether the viral sequence is present in the patient, which could not have gotten there without infection by that virus.
 

vibise

Well-known member
With a survival rate of 99.whatever%, we still have people trying to shame other people into taking an experimental injection that does not even confer immunity to get that extra .5% protection. That's called hysteria. I don't think they really hear themselves anymore.

I wonder how they're dealing with the fact that the spike protein is damaging on its own without the virus? My guess is that they're not even going to look into it because their cognitive dissonance demands it.
The fact right now is that ICUs are full of covid patients who are unvaccinated. Explain that.

Vaccinated people are not dying in droves because of damage due to the spike protein. If you think that is happening, show the evidence. Your predictions and fears do not count as evidence.
 

Whateverman

Well-known member
With a survival rate of 99.whatever%, we still have people trying to shame other people into taking an experimental injection that does not even confer immunity to get that extra .5% protection. That's called hysteria.
1% of 330 million people is 3.3 million.

Do you consider yourself pro-life?

Hey, Jews less than 2% of the US population died during the holocaust. Why does everyone make such a big deal out of it?

...

ps. the actual rate is closer to 98% than 99, and that doesn't include long haul victims...
 

shnarkle

Well-known member
I didn't say the manufacturers claimed the PCR tests should be run at 40 CT, just that some made their tests for that CT cycle. Others made it for lower CTs.
Nonsense. The manufacturers don't have governors on their PCR tests. Whoever runs the test decides how many cycles they're going to run.
The government doesn't control the PCR CTs the manufacturers use in their products. Maybe it should--but then far rightists would probably squawk about too much government control in our lives....
The CDC is a government agency. They're the one's who decided that the tests should be run above the recommended threshold. They ignored the fact that the inventors as well as the manufacturers all point out that the PCR test is not meant to diagnose anything.

Now the CDC finally owns up to that fact which only spotlights that there is no pandemic.
 

shnarkle

Well-known member
Many are saying the virus hasn't even been isolated.

Mike Adams has this to say.
Mike Adams always seems to be behind the curve, and he rarely provides good documentation. I prefer getting it straight from the horse's mouth. When you have the CDC admitting that they don't have an isolated or complete sequence of the virus, that's all you need. Those quotes are pure gold whereas quoting Mike Adams isn't likely to change as many minds. He's a bit too long winded for me as well.
 

Authentic Nouveau

Well-known member
Those sites will never be taken seriously by most people. You really just need to dig a little deeper to get to the sources materials from the CDC, and the FDA.

e.g.
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/...-Changes_CDC_RT-PCR_SARS-CoV-2_Testing_1.html

[2] https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices...s/sars-cov-2-reference-panel-comparative-data

[2a] https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/...s-cov-2_reference_panel_comparative_data.html

They can't argue with what the CDC is actually saying. They will always attack the messenger until you post the sources at the CDC and FDA.

On another note, the thing that I find particularly strange is that the CDC has the patent on this isolated virus. How is it that they have a patent on this virus, yet they can't seem to come up with this isolated virus?

They also concealed the fact that they had a patent on it, and three days later a pharmaceutical company filed patents regarding anti-viral agents for treatment of and control of infection of Coronavirus. How did they know about it if it was concealed from the public? This is the definition of criminal conspiracy, racketeering and collusion.
Racketeering.
 

Storch

Member
If that were the case, I would be dead or seriously ill along with the billions that have been vaccinated.
Given that the damage done by the spike-protein--on its own--is to the vascular system, perhaps we'll wait and see how this study that is being done on the public is over. However, there are many people who did collapse and die after receiving the experimental injections.
 

vibise

Well-known member
Mike Adams always seems to be behind the curve, and he rarely provides good documentation. I prefer getting it straight from the horse's mouth. When you have the CDC admitting that they don't have an isolated or complete sequence of the virus, that's all you need. Those quotes are pure gold whereas quoting Mike Adams isn't likely to change as many minds. He's a bit too long winded for me as well.
Absolutely false. We have a complete sequence, and a million replicate sequences that confirm the original one.
You are getting your information from a crazy source.

Once again, here is the complete sequence, a sequence that has been independently confirmed over a million times (actually 1,009,274 times, and counting):

 
Last edited:

vibise

Well-known member
Given that the damage done by the spike-protein--on its own--is to the vascular system, perhaps we'll wait and see how this study that is being done on the public is over. However, there are many people who did collapse and die after receiving the experimental injections.
We have many more unvaccinated people with covid currently clogging up the nation's ICUs.
 

Storch

Member
But it identifies whether the viral sequence is present in the patient, which could not have gotten there without infection by that virus.
So you're saying that you disagree with this:

Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms. The performance of this test has not been established for monitoring treatment of 2019-nCoV infection. This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.”
 

vibise

Well-known member
So you're saying that you disagree with this:

Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms. The performance of this test has not been established for monitoring treatment of 2019-nCoV infection. This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.”
Viral RNA could be detected after infectious virus has been cleared or rendered nonfunctional, or the patient could have symptoms due to a secondary infection with flu virus, which is not detected by the original covid test, as pointed out by the third sentence.
The second sentence only advises not to use the test to follow progression of infection during treatment.

What is the problem with any of that?
 

Storch

Member
Viral RNA could be detected after infectious virus has been cleared or rendered nonfunctional, or the patient could have symptoms due to a secondary infection with flu virus, which is not detected by the original covid test, as pointed out by the third sentence.
The second sentence only advises not to use the test to follow progression of infection during treatment.

What is the problem with any of that?
I could have sworn I heard someone say that the PCR-test detected Covid specifically. Was that you?

". . . This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.”
 

Whateverman

Well-known member
So you're saying that you disagree with this:

Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms. The performance of this test has not been established for monitoring treatment of 2019-nCoV infection. This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.”
So you're saying CDC documents are authoritative and credible?
 

Storch

Member
So you're saying CDC documents are authoritative and credible?
Well since the CDC is one of the revered sources of those who trust the science, I thought I'd throw them in your face to see how you'd try to spin their statement to mean the opposite.

So go ahead . . .
 

vibise

Well-known member
I could have sworn I heard someone say that the PCR-test detected Covid specifically. Was that you?

". . . This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.”
yes. The original test was designed to test for covid-19 and only that.

However, some of the symptoms of covid are also common to other pathogens, esp flu, and the covid test does not test for flu, so the covid test, if negative, would mean that covid was not detected, but that the disease in the patient could have been caused by other, undetected pathogens. It would therefore take other tests specific for other pathogens to rule them out as the etiological agents.

Do I need to rephrase that another way?

The covid test cannot rule out disease caused by flu or other pathogens, because it does not test for those other pathogens.

If you are sick, and a test for measles shows you are not infected with measles, that does not also mean you do not have chicken pox, because the test does not test for chicken pox.
 
Last edited:

Storch

Member
The covid test cannot rule out disease caused by flu or other pathogens, because it does not test for those other pathogens.
I see.

What better way of saying that the PCR-test was a foolish choice. If they knew that, why did they use it?
 

Storch

Member
The original test was designed to test for covid-19 and only that.
Really? So you're saying that in the beginning of testing when everyone and their brother was lining up to have a nasal-swab inserted, the test detected only Covid?
 
Top