What if people with just the common cold and Influenza are testing positive for Covid?

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: Serdgiam
Take a look into non specific cross reaction in PCR testing if you want to find out more about the possibility of other viruses giving a false positive on a covid 19 test.

You are completely twisting the point.

The point is not that some other virus causes the FP.

The point is that someone has symptoms, but actually has the flu not COVID, gets tested for COVID, and if their test results in a (F)P, it is never questioned, it is simply ass-u-me-d to be a true positive for COVID, because that is what they want to see.

What point am I missing?

If someone has symptoms of covid 19 or influenza and has a PCR test that's looking for covid 19 it won't show they have covid 19 unless they either have covid 19, there is a lab contamination issue or there is non specific cross reaction that is giving a false positive for covid 19.

They could have influenza or another virus as well but it's rare to have a positive test for covid 19 without actually having covid 19 on the sample.

That's why the new tests are quad assay, that way they can establish which virus or viruses you may or may not have



a reply to: tanstaafl

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: tanstaafl
You so realise that what you think has no bearing on the rest of the world whatsoever right?

You understand that thoughts are just in your head and cannot affect the reliability or usefulness of something?

They are just thoughts.

You do realize that the exact same thing applies to everything you say too, right?

Besides... I am not simply speaking opinion. They are pathological liars. PERIOD.

No.

What I am saying is how the test actually works.

Who are "they" that are pathological liars exactly?

Is it a group of people in general or some specific people you can name?



a reply to: tanstaafl

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: tanstaafl
What point am I missing?

The fact that countless authorities have made it quite clear that these tests are far from conclusive, for many different reasons?

If someone has symptoms of covid 19 or influenza and has a PCR test that's looking for covid 19 it won't show they have covid 19 unless they either have covid 19, there is a lab contamination issue or there is non specific cross reaction that is giving a false positive for covid 19.

Or the CT value was set way too high - as they were in 90+% of all places performing the tests (probably more, but I'll allow for some sanity) throughout this entire scamdemic.

They could have influenza or another virus as well but it's rare to have a positive test for covid 19 without actually having covid 19 on the sample.

Countless authorities disagree.

That's why the new tests are quad assay, that way they can establish which virus or viruses you may or may not have
Maybe... or maybe not... and that is the problem. You have far more confidence in these tests than even the inventor himself. Why is that? Do you know something he doesn't?

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: tanstaafl
No.

Got it - your opinion is always fact. Everyone else's is mere opinion.

What I am saying is how the test actually works.

How you believe it works. There is a difference, but apparently you exempt yourself from the same requirements you impose on everyone else.

Who are "they" that are pathological liars exactly?

99+% of the political 'doctors' like Fauci and all of them at the CDC.

Where do you even get your "information" from?

It's certainly not anywhere that knows about this kind of thing that's for sure.

The quad assay tests are not because the covid 19 only tests were not accurate at all. Unless you can actually show me some credible evidence to suggest otherwise I'm putting this on the same pile as your other "thoughts"


Still claiming that CT values are set too high as well?

You don't even know how the process actually works do you.

As to Kary Mullis and his claims as I've said to you multiple times now he was angry that PCR was being used to look for hiv in aids patients becuase he was of the mistaken belief that there was no link between hiv and aids. He was angry that his invention was used to prove him wrong.

As I've also said before.

Your inability to understand something is not a valid argument against it.




a reply to: tanstaafl

a reply to: tanstaafl

No they haven't countless internet users have made claims they do not understand. Short of contamination of the sample you cannot get a false positive on PCR tests. The only argument you could make is the amount of virus in the system as the sensitivity of the test is determined with the number of cycles you choose to do. The problem is it always errors to not diagnosing it when you actually have the virus. The PCR test has a 95 to 98 percent detection rate depending on the lab.

What happens is the PCR test is unlikely to pick up the infection within the first 5 days. So you may have symptoms get tested and it come back negative. Only later they will get a positive result but people want to claim that is wrong because they tested negative when they were actually sick.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: tanstaafl

No they haven't countless internet users have made claims they do not understand.

Whatever. You and non have made it clear you choose to believe and put your faith in tptb.

As for me and mine? No way, no how.

You still scared of the boogy man?

Who is tptb then?

I understand how a PCR test works so no faith is required.

You however have been duped into believing a Hodge podge story of hero's and villains made up on the internet by quacks, snake oil salesmen and content creators looking for ad revenue.

I expect now is the time as usual where you say you don't want to talk to me any more and call me some names right?


a reply to: tanstaafl

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: tanstaafl

No they haven't countless internet users have made claims they do not understand.

Whatever. You and non have made it clear you choose to believe and put your faith in tptb.

As for me and mine? No way, no how.

I don't have to put my faith in anyone I just need to understand the science involved. Science doesn't care about who in charge it only cares about the data. If you want to rail against the machine or as you put it the powers that be have at it. Real or imagined it doesn't matter the facts remain the test will not give you false positives.

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: tanstaafl
Who is tptb then?

You're asking that here? On a Conspiracy web forum?

I understand how a PCR test works so no faith is required.

You understand the concept. What you apparently don't grok is that the tests are entirely dependent on the design, and each batch of tests could be altered in ways unknown to you.

You have faith. I understand. I don't. Liars lie. It is what they do, and in this case, it is in their very nature.

You however have been duped into believing a Hodge podge story of hero's and villains made up on the internet by quacks, snake oil salesmen and content creators looking for ad revenue.

I expect now is the time as usual where you say you don't want to talk to me any more and call me some names right?

Actually, you're the one engaging in childish yantics (boogeyman? really?)...

originally posted by: dragonridr
I don't have to put my faith in anyone I just need to understand the science involved.

Understanding the science involved includes understanding the fact that just because you understand 'the science' conceptually has no bearing on the application of said sand that the application of said science is a physical process that does indeed require some modicum of trust that whoever is engaged in said execution of said applications of said science are trustworthy.

I submit to you that they are not. At all. None of them.

But you do you.

So you claim that every single person that works in every single lab in every single country on the planet are all untrustworthy and intentionally doing it wrong?

That's a pretty bold claim, you'd think at least some of them would have let slip by now?

How many people do you estimate are involved in this charade worldwide?



a reply to: tanstaafl

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

I am absolutely convinced that that is exactly what happened. The way the testing was done, false positives will account to up to 90% of the"cases". I know for a fact that some countries increased the number of PCR cycles last September, when numbers were running low, which would necessarily increase the number of false positives and account for the peaks that followed.

The first peak in the spring of 2020 was possibly real. After that the "pandemic"t was most likely driven by false positives and regular influenza and colds.

Had to that extremely inflated casualty numbers due to the moronic "a positive test in the 28 days prior to death" rule you have your p(l)andemic laid out.

What evidence do you have to go with this hypothesis?

Anything solid?



a reply to: aearluin

a reply to: tanstaafl

Got it - your opinion is always fact. Everyone else's is mere opinion.

Lol, pot meet kettle, perhaps this is a moment for your arrogant self, to self reflect.

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: tanstaafl

No they haven't countless internet users have made claims they do not understand.

Whatever. You and non have made it clear you choose to believe and put your faith in tptb.

As for me and mine? No way, no how.

I don't have to put my faith in anyone I just need to understand the science involved. Science doesn't care about who in charge it only cares about the data. If you want to rail against the machine or as you put it the powers that be have at it. Real or imagined it doesn't matter the facts remain the test will not give you false positives.

Judging from many of your posts on the subject, you cannot distinguish between science and dogma of the Cult of the Poisoned Mind.

Sweden declined to use the PCR test. There numbers are more accurate and truthfull.

What method do they use?



a reply to: TamtammyMacx