So,
I was recently watching a video by The Last American Vagabond where one of the discussion points was the cycle thresholds being used when processing PCRs. At one point, Ryan points out that he might be flogging a dead horse given how much time he was spending on the topic. For those of us that have been researching this stuff since the spring of 2020, the answer would be yes. However, more people are having their eyes opened each week and he is getting new subscribers and for those people, the answer might be no. It's a difficult line to walk, trying not to bore long time listeners/independent researchers while trying to play catch up with new listeners. The answer is relative to the listener and doesn't have a one size fits all answer. The point is (look, now Ryan has me saying "the point is...") that he was spending a lot of time on the topic, he noticed it, and when he wondered if he was flogging a dead horse, I said "yep" and switched to listening to music while I did something else.
Later, I was listening to something on a different topic. I can't remember who it was so I'm sorry to that person that I can't link to them. There was a statement made that went something like this. Arguing that torture is wrong because it doesn't result in getting accurate information is completely missing the point. Torture is wrong because it's immoral, regardless of the validity of the information gained. It's wrong because it's just wrong, period. This wasn't new to me but hearing it at that moment, with Ryan's PCR discussion fresh on my mind, made me think back to my initial research into PCRs and wonder if we haven't gone off track a bit.
When the COVID-19 hoax was amping up, there was a lot of focus on "cases". Not as much as there would be later in the year when the case-demic broke out (because there were no deaths to focus on) but enough to make me wonder, is PCR a valid COVID-19 test. Here's how I saw it before I knew anything about cycle thresholds.
Is PCR a valid COVID-19 test?
Is PCR a test? No. It's a process that makes copies of viral RNA. This is telling, however, they have obviously adapted it so that it can give positive/negative results so I kept asking questions.
What does PCR replicate/amplify? Viral RNA, debris left behind by viruses and bacterias. Is COVID-19 a virus or bacteria? No, it's a disease. Therefore, it's factually impossible to use PCR as a COVID-19 test.
Maybe they are actually testing for the SARS-CoV-2 virus and have misnamed it as a COVID-19 test. Does PCR identify which virus or bacteria left the viral RNA? No, a different technique has to be applied to the amplified sample to identify it. Has the SARS-CoV-2 protein been sequenced (aka identified)? No. So, even if PCR had the capability of identifying the responsible virus or bacteria, it wouldn't find SARS-CoV-2. So, PCR is not a misnamed SARS-CoV-2 test.
It turns out that PCR is simply "a method widely used to rapidly make millions to billions of copies of a specific DNA sample, allowing scientists to take a very small sample of DNA and amplify it to a large enough amount to study in detail." (Wikipedia) and not a test or a COVID-19 test or a SARS-CoV-2 test.
This made me wonder if arguing that PCR was invalid as a COVID-19 test because they are using high cycle thresholds which are guaranteed to return extremely high numbers of false positives is completely missing the point. Maybe PCR is invalid as a COVID-19 test because it doesn't actually test for COVID-19, regardless of cycle threshold. Maybe using PCR as a "COVID-19" test is wrong because it's just the wrong tool, period. Even if you lowered the cycle threshold down to 24 where a positive result would indicate that the person has a disease and is contagious, you'd have to do other tests to find out what disease the person actually had.
Historically, we see PCR being used as a "whooping cough test" that upended lives for 8 months. When they used an actual whooping cough test, they found zero cases. PCR was used as a "swine flu test" to fuel a fake pandemic where it turned out that there was, what, one confirmed case? PCR amplifies viral RNA, which humans have in their bodies even when they are healthy. Magnifying that RNA to a point where it can be detected and then claiming that it can only come from the disease flavor of the month is beyond disingenuous. PCR does not do what officials are claiming that it does. It's just the wrong tool. You might as well stick a microscope up everyone's nose and if it comes out with snot on it, declare the person tested positive for COVID-19. I'll leave it up to you to decide the intent and morality of knowingly using an incorrect medical tool to pronounce a diagnosis.
Rather than flogging a dead horse with our (because I've done it too) long discussions about cycle thresholds, maybe we are instead flogging a red herring.
Recent Comments