New York Times On PCR Test Accuracy

[Drareg]

This is a strange article for The NY Times, the last few months they have been pumping the hysteric doomsday narrative now switched to a casedemic doomsday narrative, when things don’t pan out they just change the story.
This story sets off alarm bells for me, what’s their angle with admitting PCR testing is redundant at this point? Is it public pressure, many of the COVID cult are questioning the PCR tests so maybe it’s this, is it to cover themselves because of the fraudulent stories designed to generate hysterics they pumped for months now, articles like this can be pointed at to claim they were impartial?

We know they are a PR machine for whoever pays the highest dollar, it’s probably because of another big pharma test in the pipeline about to be released, I’m sure it will be just as dodgy and designed to maintain the doomsday narrative, it will of course make billions for the company and investors selling it.


Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be.

Some of the nation’s leading public health experts are raising a new concern in the endless debate over coronavirus testing in the United States: The standard tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus.

But yes-no isn’t good enough, he added. It’s the amount of virus that should dictate the infected patient’s next steps. “It’s really irresponsible, I think, to forgo the recognition that this is a quantitative issue,” Dr. Mina said.

The PCR test amplifies genetic matter from the virus in cycles; the fewer cycles required, the greater the amount of virus, or viral load, in the sample. The greater the viral load, the more likely the patient is to be contagious.

This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients, although it could tell them how infectious the patients are.

In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.

On Thursday, the United States recorded 45,604 new coronavirus cases, according to a database maintained by The Times. If the rates of contagiousness in Massachusetts and New York were to apply nationwide, then perhaps only 4,500 of those people may actually need to isolate and submit to contact tracing.

One solution would be to adjust the cycle threshold used now to decide that a patient is infected. Most tests set the limit at 40, a few at 37. This means that you are positive for the coronavirus if the test process required up to 40 cycles, or 37, to detect the virus.

Tests with thresholds so high may detect not just live virus but also genetic fragments, leftovers from infection that pose no particular risk — akin to finding a hair in a room long after a person has left, Dr. Mina

 

[Drareg]

This thread highlighted the PCR testing in Taiwan using cycle threshold a few months back.
Taiwan has a semiconductor industry that is a big player in the criminal claus schwaub’s fourth industrial revolution, no surprise then their testing method was logical, they couldn’t shut it down.

Covid-19, PCR Test Validity And Second Surge Sham?

 

[Geronimo]

Yeah I saw this today. I was very confused reading it, because I've been telling my friends and family that the single biggest hole in the official narrative is how unreliable the PCR test is. When you pair it with a policy where we count any (false) positive person dying for any reason as a covid death, we end up at our current completely inaccurate death counts.

Why are they publishing this? I know they're corrupt, but they're absolutely correct in this article. It blows not just a hole in the argument, it blows THE hole in the argument. Your theory makes sense about a new test coming down the pipeline that's somehow even worse. Or a few people at the Times grew a conscience. Both are in play. It definitely has to weaken people's trust in the numbers either way, which is a good thing and a possible miscalculation on their end, depending on motives. It's really weird, but I'll take anything I can get at this point that weakens the official narrative. You'd have to be seriously delusional to believe the official narrative at this point if you did any independent reading at all.

 

[tankasnowgod]

I think this is a sign that, one way or another, this operation is starting to wrap up.

Fauci has been silenced, under the cover of "throat polyp surgery." Scott Atlas being put on the Coronavirus task force was also a good sign.

More and more people are starting to wake up, actively question the fraud, and are willing to protest it, even if the government won't "allow" those protests.

 

[Drareg]

Yeah I saw this today. I was very confused reading it, because I've been telling my friends and family that the single biggest hole in the official narrative is how unreliable the PCR test is. When you pair it with a policy where we count any (false) positive person dying for any reason as a covid death, we end up at our current completely inaccurate death counts.

Why are they publishing this? I know they're corrupt, but they're absolutely correct in this article. It blows not just a hole in the argument, it blows THE hole in the argument. Your theory makes sense about a new test coming down the pipeline that's somehow even worse. Or a few people at the Times grew a conscience. Both are in play. It definitely has to weaken people's trust in the numbers either way, which is a good thing and a possible miscalculation on their end, depending on motives. It's really weird, but I'll take anything I can get at this point that weakens the official narrative. You'd have to be seriously delusional to believe the official narrative at this point if you did any independent reading at all.

Let’s see where they go, it’s the start of a new narrative, a new approach because winter is arriving, they need to generate hysteria off firmer foundations, newer fraudulent foundations that is, when joe public starts grasping the meaning of the words or understanding the concepts the ruling class change to a new paradigm they create and design, joe then has to learn the new concept which gives them times to generate hysteria, it’s similar to words like austerity being adjusted to fiscal measures when joe gets austerity.

Anyone with a conscience left that paper along time ago, it’s a complete fraud, the word treasonous gets thrown around a lot but that’s what this organization is doing, one of the many examples is the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, they know far more than they will print, what goes to print is a form of damage limitation, if it comes out in alternative media then the NY Times ramps up the gate keeping limited articles, the thing is the ruling class couldn’t care less for the constitution, they hate it and want their United Nations constitution in place instead, treasonous is a compliment to them.

 

[Drareg]

I think this is a sign that, one way or another, this operation is starting to wrap up.

Fauci has been silenced, under the cover of "throat polyp surgery." Scott Atlas being put on the Coronavirus task force was also a good sign.

More and more people are starting to wake up, actively question the fraud, and are willing to protest it, even if the government won't "allow" those protests.

Let’s see, they need this for their fourth industrial revolution, the great reset , this contact tracing was the first step, it’s possible this will be the deal come this winter, if you use contact tracing we will not do lockdowns.

I’m sure they are nervous after seeing the protests in Berlin and London yesterday and a few weeks ago, the protests will only grow.

It’s still astounding to witness the trust some in the public have, these are the same people bailing banks out via the tax payer, become billionaires via the tax payer , are involved with child sex traffickers etc etc, all they need to do is tell the public a feel good script and it works, the public want to believe they mean well and care in spite of the continued abuse, the parroting is nauseating.

 

[Vinny]

This is a strange article for The NY Times, the last few months they have been pumping the hysteric doomsday narrative now switched to a casedemic doomsday narrative, when things don’t pan out they just change the story.
This story sets off alarm bells for me, what’s their angle with admitting PCR testing is redundant at this point? Is it public pressure, many of the COVID cult are questioning the PCR tests so maybe it’s this, is it to cover themselves because of the fraudulent stories designed to generate hysterics they pumped for months now, articles like this can be pointed at to claim they were impartial?

We know they are a PR machine for whoever pays the highest dollar, it’s probably because of another big pharma test in the pipeline about to be released, I’m sure it will be just as dodgy and designed to maintain the doomsday narrative, it will of course make billions for the company and investors selling it.


Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be.

Some of the nation’s leading public health experts are raising a new concern in the endless debate over coronavirus testing in the United States: The standard tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus.

But yes-no isn’t good enough, he added. It’s the amount of virus that should dictate the infected patient’s next steps. “It’s really irresponsible, I think, to forgo the recognition that this is a quantitative issue,” Dr. Mina said.

The PCR test amplifies genetic matter from the virus in cycles; the fewer cycles required, the greater the amount of virus, or viral load, in the sample. The greater the viral load, the more likely the patient is to be contagious.

This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients, although it could tell them how infectious the patients are.

In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.

On Thursday, the United States recorded 45,604 new coronavirus cases, according to a database maintained by The Times. If the rates of contagiousness in Massachusetts and New York were to apply nationwide, then perhaps only 4,500 of those people may actually need to isolate and submit to contact tracing.

One solution would be to adjust the cycle threshold used now to decide that a patient is infected. Most tests set the limit at 40, a few at 37. This means that you are positive for the coronavirus if the test process required up to 40 cycles, or 37, to detect the virus.

Tests with thresholds so high may detect not just live virus but also genetic fragments, leftovers from infection that pose no particular risk — akin to finding a hair in a room long after a person has left, Dr. Mina

Even NYT can't afford to publish only lies and propaganda all the time. It doesn't work that way. The best is to give the public some true in a long row of pervertism, so that one wouldn't lose attention and be kept on the hook for as long as it's necessary.
This article will hardly change anything in the whole picture. It is not meant to - that's my guess.

 

[Geronimo]

It's up to us to share it to people who only trust mainstream media and simultaneously inform them that any person testing positive that dies of any cause gets counted as a covid death. If they can't piece together the implications of that, then they're hopeless.

 

[Regina]

Let’s see where they go, it’s the start of a new narrative, a new approach because winter is arriving, they need to generate hysteria off firmer foundations, newer fraudulent foundations that is, when joe public starts grasping the meaning of the words or understanding the concepts the ruling class change to a new paradigm they create and design, joe then has to learn the new concept which gives them times to generate hysteria, it’s similar to words like austerity being adjusted to fiscal measures when joe gets austerity.

Anyone with a conscience left that paper along time ago, it’s a complete fraud, the word treasonous gets thrown around a lot but that’s what this organization is doing, one of the many examples is the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, they know far more than they will print, what goes to print is a form of damage limitation, if it comes out in alternative media then the NY Times ramps up the gate keeping limited articles, the thing is the ruling class couldn’t care less for the constitution, they hate it and want their United Nations constitution in place instead, treasonous is a compliment to them.

Meanwhile, the CDC quietly publishes lower death rates.
They are making sure to get ahead of it. 'As soon as we learn new facts, we report them.'
But I just think something else is planned. As even the color war is growing a beard.
I suspect a big old blackout. Blamed on the chinese or russians to usher in the "great" reset with cyber security priority number one.
Total chaos. Everything grinds to halt. (harken The Day The Earth Stood Still). We need the blockchain AI robots to maintain the peace.

They have to save us from external threats: parasites, weird bugs, viruses, bacteria, climate change, food shortages, aliens and power grid attacks.

 

[tankasnowgod]

We need the blockchain AI robots to maintain the peace.

Those things have nothing to do with each other. Blockchain is simply an open source ledger protected by cryptography. It is a far better and more transparent system that all of the secret ledgers that are currently in use, and have been since 1933. Well over 90% of that money is electronic already, so a lot of the fear is about something that has largely already been in place for 30 or so years.

AI, on the otherhand, is apparently the entity that the Inbred Satanic Gangsters that rule the world take orders from- Benjamin Fulford 7/20/20 Report: World Intelligence Agencies Think We Live in a Matrix Controlled by an Artificial Intelligence

And robots? Well, robots never work- Robot Apocalypse

 

[Regina]

Those things have nothing to do with each other. Blockchain is simply an open source ledger protected by cryptography. It is a far better and more transparent system that all of the secret ledgers that are currently in use, and have been since 1933. Well over 90% of that money is electronic already, so a lot of the fear is about something that has largely already been in place for 30 or so years.

AI, on the otherhand, is apparently the entity that the Inbred Satanic Gangsters that rule the world take orders from- Benjamin Fulford 7/20/20 Report: World Intelligence Agencies Think We Live in a Matrix Controlled by an Artificial Intelligence

And robots? Well, robots never work- Robot Apocalypse

I'd love to see that Cambrian explosion. He doesn't include City of London in his final list.
I have no issue with blockchain. But like diplomatic immunity, everything they do will be private but everything we do tracked and traced.
If they can succeed in bringing down all but the Inbred Satanic Gangsters, the rest will have to be on their reward token system. Libra? Ripple? I don't know much about the different coins.
But I think they will maintain their weapons, drugs, money laundering, and resource stealing with final solution total privacy all under the guise of "National Security".

I don't know how control of the financial system is wristed from them.

 

[tankasnowgod]

He doesn't include City of London in his final list.

I don't know how control of the financial system is wristed from them.

Fulford has mentioned London plenty. According to prior reports, they are already in agreement.

It would have to be some sort of event exactly like we are going through. The plan set forth in the document "On The Road To The Golden Age" was basically

1. Rack up lots of debt and print lots of money.
2. Soak up as many benefits as you can from the unbacked fiat system.
3. Crash the system by running it to infinity
4. Set up gold standard.

You can check off the first three. It's hard to tell on the ground who is "winning," dark hats or white hats (or gray hats). We are in the revolution now (it's not fighting off an invasion, these people have had control for centuries). This could very well be what "winning" looks like.

Fulford keeps on saying victory is just a matter of time at this point. The controllers are very few in numbers, maybe tens or hundreds of thousands worldwide. Their biggest mistake was hiring "normal" people to protect them.

In any revolution in history, if the military and/or the police stand with the people, victory is assured, and usually swift. USA is a bit of a wildcard, because there is still a well armed militia, so the military and police might not have to stand with the people for victory. But militia plus military plus police = game over.

 

[Drareg]

Meanwhile, the CDC quietly publishes lower death rates.
They are making sure to get ahead of it. 'As soon as we learn new facts, we report them.'
But I just think something else is planned. As even the color war is growing a beard.
I suspect a big old blackout. Blamed on the chinese or russians to usher in the "great" reset with cyber security priority number one.
Total chaos. Everything grinds to halt. (harken The Day The Earth Stood Still). We need the blockchain AI robots to maintain the peace.

They have to save us from external threats: parasites, weird bugs, viruses, bacteria, climate change, food shortages, aliens and power grid attacks.

Yes I’m sure another "crisis" is in the wings, they have their elite meeting in Davos to do first though, no lockdowns or hysteria before then or they can’t go, just like lockdowns were lifted for the elites holidays which start around July most years.

 

[Drareg]

Even NYT can't afford to publish only lies and propaganda all the time. It doesn't work that way. The best is to give the public some true in a long row of pervertism, so that one wouldn't lose attention and be kept on the hook for as long as it's necessary.
This article will hardly change anything in the whole picture. It is not meant to - that's my guess.

Yes, it’s just cover so they can claim impartiality if they end up in court, not that they expect to see the inside of one anytime soon.

 

[lvysaur]

I'm slowly warming up to the 5G theory.

The tests are giving false negatives for people who clearly have the disease. And false positives for people with no symptoms.
The TV ads have just started advertising 5G in the last few months.

It mysteriously mutated, for no reason at all, to a 10x deadlier form in Europe.

It actually is possible to produce a virus-like particle intracellularly by exposure to certain types of radiation.
So COV2 could be a radiation-induced exosome. If that is the case, I would still think the exosome could be contagious.

 

[tankasnowgod]

The tests are giving false negatives for people who clearly have the disease.

False positives are pretty easy to demonstrate. For example, if you run a sterile swab, and it comes back positive, obviously false positive. Paw paw, goat, healthy person..... same deal

The entire narrative in this so called pandemic is that there is a "novel" virus out there. How can you be sure someone has a virus if the test comes back negative? Do you know of a more reliable method of determining if the virus is present? And if so, why not just use that in the first place?

Claiming there is a virus present without any sort of test is called "guessing."

It mysteriously mutated, for no reason at all, to a 10x deadlier form in Europe.

Again..... any proof of this idea? Do you have DNA sequences on hand of the two strains? Or better yet...... Electron Micrographs of both? And papers demonstrating Koch's Postulates have been fulfilled on both strains? And that one strain is, indeed, 10x more deadly? All the time?

I think this goes back to the term "guessing."

Rather than making up stories and assumptions, you could always go with the fact that different countries have different criteria for the same test. This was known about in the AIDS days. There was joke that said you could change your AIDS diagnosis simply by moving. This was due to the fact that all countries (and even states) had different criteria for how to interpret a Western Blot as positive or negative. The same concept applies to the PCR.

 

[lvysaur]

Again..... any proof of this idea?

I've posted proof several times. I operate under the assumption that the scientists on the ground may be mistaken on things, but aren't blatantly making up facts.
So I trust them that the European coronavirus has 10x higher binding capacity than the Chinese one. It also reflects well in the death rates seen in March.

If you think it not to be true, how about you provide a reason why it's not true? Your "different country standards" is rebutted by the fact that Californians had a 10x lower death rate than New Yorkers. Unless you can demonstrate to me that west coasters had drastically different COVID tests despite living in the same country.

A 5G radiation-induced exosome would explain the sudden "mutation" in Europe, since Europe has vastly different 5G equipment than China (and China is also the world's leader in 5G, maybe they had a safer infrastructure?)

 

[Geronimo]

I've posted proof several times. I operate under the assumption that the scientists on the ground may be mistaken on things, but aren't blatantly making up facts.
So I trust them that the European coronavirus has 10x higher binding capacity than the Chinese one. It also reflects well in the death rates seen in March.

If you think it not to be true, how about you provide a reason why it's not true? Your "different country standards" is rebutted by the fact that Californians had a 10x lower death rate than New Yorkers. Unless you can demonstrate to me that west coasters had drastically different COVID tests despite living in the same country.

A 5G radiation-induced exosome would explain the sudden "mutation" in Europe, since Europe has vastly different 5G equipment than China (and China is also the world's leader in 5G, maybe they had a safer infrastructure?)

Please don't say "I posted it somewhere". Post it here because you were asked by someone in this thread to provide evidence of your claims made in this thread.

 

[tankasnowgod]

I've posted proof several times.

You haven't posted proof of a so called "mutation" anywhere.

And I'm interested how you can even have proof of a "false negative" covid test in the general population.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Your "different country standards" is rebutted by the fact that Californians had a 10x lower death rate than New Yorkers.

Not really. States within the US also have different standards.

From 2 seconds of Googling- How Virginia Juked Its COVID-19 Data

"But these rosy numbers may conceal a problem: A lack of federal guidelines has created huge variation in how states are reporting their COVID-19 data and in what kind of data they provide to the public.

These gaps can be used for political advantage. In at least one state, Virginia, senior officials are blending the results of two different types of coronavirus test in order to report a more favorable result to the public. This harms the integrity of the data they use to make decisions, reassure residents, and justify reopening their economy.

Other differences make it hard to track the pandemic. In at least three other states, officials have lumped together probable and confirmed COVID-19 deaths; most don’t specify how they’re counting deaths. While most states report the number of people who have been tested for the coronavirus, six states say they track the number of samples that have been tested—and California and New Jersey switched methods in the past few weeks. Louisiana, Nebraska, Nevada, and New York do not report the racial or ethnic breakdown of coronavirus cases."

So, not only is there variations between states (and probably cities, doctors, and labs), but also between the same states at different times. A California COVID report in April used different standards than a California report in June.