A previous post by Jennifer Cabrera and Alex Rodriguez, “Why mass PCR testing of the healthy and asymptomatic is currently counter-productive,” discussed some of the problems with PCR tests. The short version is that documented studies show that PCR tests are too sensitive to identify live virus (infectious people) when they use a cycle threshold over 34, and almost all labs in the United States use at least 37, if not 40 or 42, cycles. The New York Times reported that these tests can produce 40% to 90% false positive results. (If you don’t have a subscription you can read the summary from Apoorva Mandavilli’s Twitter account.)
(See link for article)
_____________________
**Comment**
Hopefully this once again shows that the entire COVID-19 debacle is built upon a house of cards. A test designed to pretty much show only positives.
This purposely flawed testing is the premise behind all of the lockdowns, restrictions, mask mandates, school closures, and contact tracing.
DURHAM, N.C. – Nov. 10, 2020 – PRLog — Galaxy Diagnostics, Inc., the science leader in sample enrichment powered testing solutions for elusive flea and tick-borne pathogens, today announced the launch of the Nanotrap® Urine Test for Lyme Borreliosis. This urine-based Lyme antigen test provides the most sensitive direct detection of Borrelia burgdorferi infection at all stages of the disease. The test provides advantages antibody testing does not, namely:
Identifies positive cases missed by CDC-recommended Two-Tiered Testing (TTT)
Reduces concern for false positive results via direct detection of OspA proteins
Uses easy-to-collect urine sample
The revolutionary test greatly increases the likelihood of Lyme disease confirmation via innovative Nanotrap® technology developed by Ceres Nanosciences. Nanotrap® particles capture and concentrate low abundance Outer surface protein A (OspA) in urine samples confirmed by a highly sensitive Western blot.
Published data shows that the Nanotrap Urine Test is very effective for confirmation of early stage Lyme borreliosis in patients with EM rashes (24/24). Galaxy validation data (unpublished) shows that the Nanotrap® Urine Test will often confirm active infection in patients with negative TTT results. Further research is needed to confirm clinical utility for other presentations of Lyme borreliosis, including Lyme arthritis, Lyme carditis, and neuroborreliosis.
“The addition of the Nanotrap® test aligns with our mission to bring the most scientifically advanced sample enrichment technologies and diagnostic advances to the forefront of flea and tick borne disease”, said Galaxy CEO Amanda Elam. “Lyme disease is the fastest growing tick-borne illness in the United States. We are committed to improving the standard of care around detection of these elusive, low abundance pathogens to ensure better patient care for millions globally.”
Galaxy advocates for a new standard of care in Lyme Borreliosis testing and recommends a combination diagnostic protocol with Nanotrap® Urine test to confirm active infection and the CDC recommended TTT to detect the presence of antibodies.
You can order here and learn more at galaxydx.com.
About Galaxy Diagnostics
Galaxy Diagnostics is a privately held medical laboratory located in Research Triangle Park offering the only testing solutions powered by revolutionary sample enrichment technologies for elusive flea and tick borne pathogens. The company’s mission is to “Go Beyond” the limits of conventional detection by driving scientific innovation, creating new clinical knowledge through research and publication, and providing medical education and excellent customer support to healthcare providers, veterinarians, patients, and research customers in this important area of emerging infectious disease.
About Ceres Nanosciences
Ceres Nanosciences is a privately held company, located in Northern Virginia, focused on incorporating its novel Nanotrap® particle technology into a range of diagnostic products and workflows. The Nanotrap® particle technology can improve diagnostic testing by capturing, concentrating, and preserving low abundance analytes from biological samples. The Nanotrap® particle technology was developed with support from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation,Schmidt Futures, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), and the Commonwealth of Virginia.
According to Dr. Shor, this “urine-based antigentest,” based on the OspA protein, is 100% sensitive for acute cases with EM rash(24/24 patients with EM rash tested positive). Please remember that while appearing successful for acute Lyme, this is a small study group. Also, having the EM rash is DIAGNOSTIC for Lyme – i.e. no testing even required.
It is far less effective for those who are chronically infected. It was positive for 42% out of 100 chronically ill patients.
I believe I heard Dr. Klinghardt recommend rolfing (deep tissue massage) before taking this test to force the organisms out in the blood where they can be excreted and picked up on this urine test.
Diagnosing people early is critical as doctors, despite knowing this complex illness can become very severe and more difficult to treat if left untreated, continue to take a ‘wait and see’ approach. They continue to rely upon faulty testing that misses anywhere from 70-86% of cases, and often wait for test results before treating – dooming thousands of patients to a life-time of suffering. This test will hopefully help these early cases; however, it will not be as effective for the chronically infected – nor help with those who are coinfected.
Diagnosing tick-borne illness has always been a clinical diagnosis.
Time for doctors to become educated instead of lazily relying upon faulty testing.
Two models were developed to estimate Lyme borreliosis (LB) cases. One was based on the seroprevalence of Borrelia infections in human samples. This model used corrections for false negative and false positive results from published test sensitivity and specificity measures. A second model based on Borrelia infections in sentinel dogs was used to quantify the prevalence of Lyme disease Borrelia infections in humans; the reference baseline for this model was human and canine infections in Germany. A comparison of the two models is shown and differences discussed. The relationships between incidence, prevalence and total infection burden for LB were derived from published data and these were used in both models to calculate annual incidence, prevalence and total LB infections. The modelling was conservative and based on medical insurance records coded for erythema migrans. Linear model growth rates were used in place of the commonly adopted exponential growth. The mean of the two models was used to create estimates for various countries and continents. Examples from the analyses for LB estimated for 2018 include:
incidence –
USA 473,000/year
Germany 471,000/year
France 434,000/year
UK 132,000/year
prevalence –
USA 2.4 million
Germany 2.4 million
France 2.2 million
UK 667,000
total infections –
USA 10.1 million
Germany 10.0 million
France 9.3 million
UK 2.8 million
Estimates for the world for 2018 are:
incidence
12.3 million/year
prevalence
62.1 million
total infection burden
262.0 million
These figures are far higher than officially published data and reflect not only the underestimation of diagnosed cases, which is acknowledged by health agencies, but also undiagnosed and misdiagnosed cases.
Join us to advance diagnostics for Lyme disease by being in a research study
Lyme disease if often missed or misdiagnosed. If you have recently been diagnosed with Lyme diasea, or suspect a recent infection, your immune system may hold kay information that can help advance development of a novel diagnostic. By developing a test that recognizes specific immune cells, we may enable more reliable detection of Lyme biases than current diagnostic tests.
You will be compensated $50 for study participation.
Tony Fauci makes a point of saying the PCR COVID test is useless and misleading when the test is run at “35 cycles or higher.” A positive result, indicating infection, cannot be accepted or believed.
Here, in techno-speak, is an excerpt from Fauci’s key quote (starting at about the 4-minute mark [1]):
“…If you get [perform the test at] a cycle threshold of 35 or more… the chances of it being replication-confident [aka accurate] are miniscule… you almost never can culture virus [detect a true positive result] from a 37 threshold cycle…even 36…”
What Fauci failed to say on the video is: the FDA, which authorizes the test for public use, recommends the test should be run up to 40 cycles. Not 35.
Therefore, all labs in the US that follow the FDA guideline are knowingly or unknowingly participating in fraud. Fraud on a monstrous level, because millions of Americans are being told they are infected with the virus on the basis of a false positive result, and the total number of COVID cases in America — which is based on the test — is a gross falsity. (See link for article)
The entire COVID-19 house of cards is built upon this faulty testing which is designed to drastically inflate case numbers.
Rapport’s evidence is found on the FDA website:in a document titled [2]: “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel For Emergency Use Only.” See page 35.
FDA: “…a specimen is considered positive for 2019-nCoV [virus] if all 2019-nCoV marker (N1, N2) cycle threshold growth curves cross the threshold line within 40.00 cycles (< 40.00 Ct).”
“Most tests set the limit at 40 [cycles]. A few at 37.”
The Times:“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…”
The labs purposely won’t reveal their collusion.
Rapport states this should be taken to court. I agree.
Regarding facemasks, Dr. Fauci stated back in May that masks might make people ‘feel better’ but that they often create unintended consequences. He also states they don’t provide perfect protection.
Of course he reversed this some time later because the fear narrative had to be pushed. The fact the largest study on face masks has been rejected by 3 journals tells you of the major spin doctoring going on:
July 16, 2020, podcast, “This Week in Virology”
Madison Area Lyme Support Group 