Testing. The New York Times has a good reference page on covid stats which it keeps updated.
Dr. Mike Yeadon of the UK wrote convincingly in the fall of 2020 that the standards for PCR testing were so dramatically amplifying the virus found in the sample that it was calling “positive” a tiny bit of virus material that could not make anyone ill. Read his article, The PCR False Positive Pseudo-Epidemic. Pseudo epidemic is right! We should all ask why would the authorities want millions of people to falsely believe they had and could transmit the coronavirus? (Taking control of us and selling vaccines come to mind.)
Many other qualified experts and even the FDA has warned about a procedural problem that can inflate numbers. Basically, the PCR test looks for fragments of virus. One piece of virus will not make you sick. The number actually found had just mathematically been multiplied by up to a trillion times (45 cycles) and called “positive”. Some critics have claimed that the false positives might be 90%+. The procedure was belatedly made more realistic but not until panic was spread and lockdowns had been justified.
The administration’s go-to coronavirus expert, Anthony Fauci, MD, may have known since July 2020 that most Covid-19 “cases” are not what they are said to be. He explains that the US routinely uses a PCR testing standard of 42-45 cycles [whatever that is?], but any positive test above 35 cycles is a false positive. There may be bits of virus material detected, but the patient does not have enough to be sick or contagious. Doesn’t that mean that much of the hoopla is misguided? Dr. Fauci discussed the issue in this interview video. There is more detail in this news article. Read what Harvard has to say about tests.
It is a bit of a worry that the many (if not all) the swabs jammed up our noses are from China and are saturated with ethylene oxide which the EPA classified as a human carcinogen in December 2016. It can also cause genetic damage. We can only hope that unless you have to have lots of tests (e.g. weekly testing mandated for the un-vaccinated), the amount of exposure is too low to produce these effects.
Antibody-type blood tests can tell you if you are currently ill but are not useful to show immunity after the vaccine. An article by popular writer Jon Rappoport explains it this way: “the vaccine creates specific antibodies against the spike protein, not the virus. If you take the standard antibody test after vaccination, it’ll be useless, because the test isn’t meant to detect antibodies against the spike protein.”
Case #’s. The New York Times has a good reference page on covid stats which it keeps updated. It is seldom mentioned but obvious and logical that the greater number of tests are performed, the more cases will be identified and counted. Therefore, elevated case numbers do not necessarily mean that the problem is growing. Here are some factors that make case numbers hard to interpret:
- The counts may be lower than reality because millions of people were never tested. E.g., they had mild or no symptoms (that can be up to 80% of infections) or they did not have access to testing. If there indeed have been substantially more cases, that might mean we are closer to “herd immunity” than the numbers would suggest.
- On the other hand, the case numbers may be massively overstated because:
- The testing protocol (see Testing above) has been creating an extremely high rate of false positive results.
- There was no control at the federal level to account for duplication because a person might have had more than one test done at different sites (e.g. one in a drive thru and one at the hospital).
- Hospitals and clinics may mistakenly label any upper respiratory ailment (e.g. flu, pneumonia or Tuberculosis) as “presumed covid-19”. (They have a financial incentive to do that, because hospitals are paid more for treating covid-19 cases.)