| There are 22 comments on this blog. |
|
|
NR is frantically searching the "science" for the opposing answer to the conundrum
|
|
|
NR, science,,
|
|
|
LOL, fist line of the article calls it an "alleged disease".
Tell that to Brazil and India.
|
|
|
Wow bwana, I'm surprised you made through the headline...
|
|
|
I love looking at kook fake news sites!
|
|
|
The only scam that's happening is on people who read that garbage and don't know any better but to believe it. It's chock-full of one mistruth after another.
|
|
|
I mean, it's just so full of twisted facts that I said to myself when reading it, "Did I actually read that right? Let me check again."
|
|
|
nr, you are a propagandist. The CDC did change to goal post again.
|
|
|
No they didn't.
Explain how you think they did.
|
|
|
Of course ! Alex was right Again.
Even the inventor of the PCR test , who won a Noble Prize for it, was on record "Not to be used for detection of Covid." Even the instructions said that to. Dead August 2019, Apparently of pneumonia. At 54 ? I think they said. How does that happen ?
|
|
|
"No they didn't.
Explain how you think they did"
It is on their website! .
|
|
|
nr, do you think the Russians might have hacked the CDC website?
|
|
|
They didn't change the definition of a COViD case at all. They're just going to be investigating the symptomatic ones. Asymptomatic cases still get recorded as cases. And they are going to look for variants of concern now using a lower Ct threshold. That's why they sequence the RT PCR product. Doesn't mean that they are going to ignore the results of the PCR test in terms of counting cases.
|
|
|
"now using a lower Ct threshold"
Moving the goal post again..
|
|
|
no it's not.
Forget it. I feel like I'm talking to a brick well, with all due respect.
|
|
|
*wall
|
|
|
OK Mr Science...
|
|
|
U mean I have to get off the couch?!
|
|
|
"now using a lower Ct threshold"
Moving the goal post again..
.
.
+1
|
|
|
This lady says it all. Again.
|
|
|
Link to IG post related to Nobel Prize PCR test inventor Kary Mullis who has been a critic of Dr Fauci and big Pharma for 30 years. He clearly states that PCR "is not intended to detect a virus".
Apparently PCR can detect the presence of any specified molecule. Mullis states "if you do a good job of PCR you can find anything in anybody", you literally can amplify the presence of a single molecule up to something 'meaningful' and distort the truth when needed.
You just shift the goal posts on the threshold for pass/fail.
The guy died late 2019 of Pneumonia who could have blown the lid off the COVID test strategy.
|
|
|
Again, they didn't change the definition of a COVID case at all. They're just going to be investigating the symptomatic ones. Asymptomatic cases still get recorded as cases. And they haven't changed the PCR threshold as to what defines a positive case. They simply are going to lower the cuttoff point for taking the next step with the DNA they amplified, which is to sequence it. You don't need to sequence the DNA to count COVID cases. Just to look for things like variants of concern.
There simply is willful ignorance going on here.
|
| There are 22 comments on this blog. |
