Kary Mullis inventor of PCR test said they weren't to be used for diagnosis. Hence, the tests were flawed and showed mostly false positives. This was done on purposely.
- ...
- 1008 posts total
I Currently pay $81AUD per week for platinum health insurance, which covers me fully for just about any circumstance, including private hospital admissions and any specialist treatment required therein. Then an additional $5.60 for any pharmaceutical my doctor may prescribe, whether it cost $15 or $2,000 (because my wonderful government subsidises it) Somehow I don’t think what you see in Australia is coming to the US of A anytime soon. |
PCR is not flawed in my opinion, it is just too sensitive. In theory, it can detect and amplify a single molecule which means that everything about the test is sensitive to possible environmental contamination. In addition, a person can have a few viruses in their nasal swab, have absolutely no symptoms and potentially never will, yet be positive by PCR. This person may also be unlikely to spread the virus for the same reason. Furthermore, an inexact match with a target molecule from a related virus under certain conditions could potentially be amplified. It only takes one false positive priming event to generate a template that can then be amplified and become a false positive signal. The only way to know if this happens is by running a secondary test to determine the authenticity of the amplicon such as DNA sequencing. It would have been interesting to know what percentage of unvaccinated people have covid-19 antibodies. However, it is unlikely to ever be done. Why? |
Kary Mullis inventor of PCR test said they weren’t to be used for diagnosis. Hence, the tests were flawed and showed mostly false positives. This was done on purposely. Didn’t quite achieve a false but made misleading https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-pcr/fact-check-inventor-of-method-used-to-test-for-covid-19-didnt-say-it-cant-be-used-in-virus-detection-idUSKBN24420X |
- 1008 posts total