The US Center for Disease Control (CDC) Begins Testing Americans for the Coronavirus—But How Reliable Are the Tests?

Pixabay
image_pdfimage_print
Investigative journalist Jon Rappoport says that the two most prevalent tests are the antibody test and PCR, and both are inaccurate because they fail to address whether the germ is the cause of the illness, or if the body has been successful in fighting off the virus, or if there is enough of the virus to cause illness. In the past, positive antibody tests were good news because they were interpreted to mean that the patient’s immune system had contacted a germ and defeated it, but now positive tests are interpreted to mean that the patient is ill or will become ill.

The PCR test requires exacting technicians to examine a tissue sample from a patient which may contain tiny particles too small to be observed, and must be blown up many times. The test fails to determine how much of the virus is in the body, as millions and millions of replicating virus are necessary to cause illness.

As my readers know, I’ve been presenting evidence AGAINST the idea that the China “epidemic” is caused by a new coronavirus. (archive here)

Of course, the World Health Organization and the US Centers for Disease Control are relentlessly pushing the idea that: this is a spreading epidemic, and it is caused by COV-19, a new human coronavirus.

Now, the US Centers for Disease Control is rolling out a program to test Americans (e.g., travelers who have been to China). As time passes, the program will likely pull larger numbers of Americans into that net.

The CDC program immediately raises two problems: why bother testing for a virus if it isn’t really causing human disease; and what kind of test is being done?

In this article, I’m focusing on the type of test, and whether it’s accurate, even if you assume the coronavirus is causing disease.

Reading through CDC literature (see also here), I believe the two most prevalent US testing methods are: antibody, and PCR.

Antibody tests are notorious for cross-reactions. This means factors in no way relevant to a given virus can make the test read positive. In that case, the patient would be falsely told he “has the coronavirus.” But it gets worse. Traditionally, antibody tests reading positive were taken as a good sign for the patient: his immune system had contacted a germ and defeated it. Then, starting in 1984, the science was turned upside down: a positive test was, astoundingly, taken to mean the patient was ill or would soon become ill.

The PCR test (which requires excellent technicians who will not make any number of possible mistakes) takes a tissue sample from a patient which might contain a tiny virus particle(s) much too small to be observed—and blows it up many times, so it can be seen. However, the test says nothing reliable about HOW MUCH virus is in the patient’s body. Why is that important? Because millions and millions of replicating virus in the body are necessary to even begin talking about actual illness. A positive PCR test, nevertheless, will be taken to mean the patient “has the epidemic disease.” —An even deeper issue: where is the PRIOR PROOF that the PCR is testing for a virus that actually causes disease?

Read full article here…

Visit our Classified ads.

Check out our Classified ads at the bottom of this page.

Recent stories & commentary

Money

Are Bankers Planning Bail-Ins Using Depositors’ Money?

July 15, 2020 James Corbett 0

Bank depositors risk losing a portion of their bank deposits. However, since each account is protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation up to $250,000, the scheme would covertly revert back to passing the bill to taxpayers to fund the FDIC, which quickly will be bankrupted by the demand for payouts.

Health

Jon Rappoport Investigates the Cult of COVID

July 10, 2020 Jon Rappoport 2

No one has done a proper study for a novel, never-seen-before virus, and it will never be attempted because it would destroy the theory that one virus is causing a pandemic. A few people at the top know the truth, but the cult operates on blind faith.

Classifieds

For classified advertising rates and terms, click here. The appearance of ads on this site does not signify endorsement by the publisher. We do not attempt to verify the accuracy of statements made therein or vouch for the integrity of advertisers. However, we will investigate complaints from readers and remove any message we find to be misleading or that promotes anything fraudulent, illegal, or unethical.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
1 Comment
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dwight Lemon
Dwight Lemon
4 months ago

Emergency Medicine doctor here: PCR amplifies minute quantities of viral RNA to get a large enough quantity so it can be detected w our current tech. If your PCR test is +, you have live virus in your body, one that has so far not been eliminated by one’s immune system. If, concurrently, you have signs/symptoms known/believed to be caused by that germ, and tests for other etiologies (causes) are negative, should assume that germ is sickening patient. Routine when one is sick w pneumonia to do long list of tests, all at the same time, as soon as diagnosis… Read more »