Archive for the ‘Viruses’ Category

Rapid COVID-19 Test – Another PCR Test Looking For Antibodies

https://nano-magazine.com/news/2020/3/19/rapid-coronavirus-test-promises-to-ease-strain-on-healthcare-systems  March 19, 2020

Excerpt:

A 15-minute coronavirus test is now available, and can ease the strain caused by the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare systems across Europe, this comes as world leaders look for solutions to combat the disease.

Using easy to collect samples, the tests detect the IgM and IgG antibodies response to the coronavirus, to identify if patients have contracted COVID-19 within minutes of testing.

_______________

**Comment**

Everyone’s assuming COVID-19 tests are accurate, when research straight from China shows they are not:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/21/study-shows-covid-19-testing-as-bad-as-lyme-msids-testing/  (Please see comment section as well)  There is a greater than 50% false positive rate and upwards to 80%!

Even the CDC states their PCR test has problems (labs can’t verify test performance):  https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/about/testing.html

This article states a drawback to PCR is that it can’t identify people who went through an infection, recovered, and cleared the virus (This is true with Lyme disease testing as well): https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/singapore-claims-first-use-antibody-test-track-coronavirus-infections

Regarding PCR testing for COVID-19, pulmonologist & epidemiologist Dr. Wobarg states:

We are currently not measuring the incidence of coronavirus diseases, but the activity of the specialists searching for them.  https://www.wodarg.com

All this test is doing is giving inaccurate results more quickly.

 

Flu Vaccine Increases Coronavirus Infection Risk 36%

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X19313647?via%3Dihub

Volume 38, Issue 2, 10 January 2020, Pages 350-354

Influenza vaccination and respiratory virus interference among Department of Defense personnel during the 2017–2018 influenza season

Highlights

    • •We examined virus interference in a Department of Defense dependent population.•Vaccinated personnel did not have significant odds of respiratory illnesses.•Vaccinated personnel were protected against influenza.•Odds of

virus interference by vaccination

    varied for individual respiratory viruses.

Abstract

Purpose

Receiving influenza vaccination may increase the risk of other respiratory viruses, a phenomenon known as virus interference. Test-negative study designs are often utilized to calculate influenza vaccine effectiveness. The virus interference phenomenon goes against the basic assumption of the test-negative vaccine effectiveness study that vaccination does not change the risk of infection with other respiratory illness, thus potentially biasing vaccine effectiveness results in the positive direction. This study aimed to investigate virus interference by comparing respiratory virus status among Department of Defense personnel based on their influenza vaccination status. Furthermore, individual respiratory viruses and their association with influenza vaccination were examined.

Results

We compared vaccination status of 2880 people with non-influenza respiratory viruses to 3240 people with pan-negative results. Comparing vaccinated to non-vaccinated patients, the adjusted odds ratio for non-flu viruses was 0.97 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86, 1.09; p = 0.60). Additionally, the vaccination status of 3349 cases of influenza were compared to three different control groups: all controls (N = 6120), non-influenza positive controls (N = 2880), and pan-negative controls (N = 3240). The adjusted ORs for the comparisons among the three control groups did not vary much (range: 0.46–0.51).

Conclusions

Receipt of influenza vaccination was not associated with virus interference among our population. Examining virus interference by specific respiratory viruses showed mixed results. Vaccine derived virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus and human metapneumovirus; however, significant protection with vaccination was associated not only with most influenza viruses, but also parainfluenza, RSV, and non-influenza virus coinfections.

____________________

**Comment**

Screen Shot 2020-03-13 at 3_06_37 PM

**Please note that seniors (the population pushed to get the flu shot) have the most recorded COVID-19 deaths**

Also, it’s important to mention that COVID-19 is mutating (as viruses tend to do): https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/21/its-not-the-exact-same-virus-everywhere-in-the-world/

Due to this fact, we can look at the ineffectiveness of the flu vaccine (9% according to last year’s stats) due to the many strains as a very real potential similar outcome regarding a COVID-19 vaccine.

Dr. Ron Paul’s Warning of ‘Coronavirus Hoax’

https://principia-scientific.org/dr-ron-pauls-warning-of-coronavirus-hoax/

Dr Ron Paul’s Warning Of ‘Coronavirus Hoax’

Written by Dr Ron Paul

America 2020 - Survival Blueprint

Dr Ron Paul suggests the coronavirus as a government-promoted hoax. His warning warrants wide consideration, not only because of Paul’s political insight, but also because he is qualified to speak on this as a medical doctor. He writes as follows:

Governments love crises because when the people are fearful they are more willing to give up freedoms for promises that the government will take care of them. After 9/11, for example, Americans accepted the near-total destruction of their civil liberties in the PATRIOT Act’s hollow promises of security.

It is ironic to see the same Democrats who tried to impeach President Trump last month for abuse of power demanding that the Administration grab more power and authority in the name of fighting a virus that thus far has killed less than 100 Americans.

Declaring a pandemic emergency on Friday, President Trump now claims the power to quarantine individuals suspected of being infected by the virus and, as Politico writes, “stop and seize any plane, train or automobile to stymie the spread of contagious disease.” He can even call out the military to cordon off a US city or state.

State and local authoritarians love panic as well. The mayor of Champaign, Illinois, signed an executive order declaring the power to ban the sale of guns and alcohol and cut off gas, water, or electricity to any citizen. The governor of Ohio just essentially closed his entire state.

The chief fearmonger of the Trump Administration is without a doubt Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health. Fauci is all over the media, serving up outright falsehoods to stir up even more panic. He testified to Congress that the death rate for the coronavirus is ten times that of the seasonal flu, a claim without any scientific basis.

On Face the Nation, Fauci did his best to further damage an already tanking economy by stating, “Right now, personally, myself, I wouldn’t go to a restaurant.” He has pushed for closing the entire country down for 14 days.

Over what? A virus that has thus far killed just over 5,000 worldwide and less than 100 in the United States?

By contrast, tuberculosis, an old disease not much discussed these days, killed nearly 1.6 million people in 2017. Where’s the panic over this?

If anything, what people like Fauci and the other fearmongers are demanding will likely make the disease worse. The martial law they dream about will leave people hunkered down inside their homes instead of going outdoors or to the beach where the sunshine and fresh air would help boost immunity. The panic produced by these fearmongers is likely helping spread the disease, as massive crowds rush into Walmart and Costco for that last roll of toilet paper.

The madness over the coronavirus is not limited to politicians and the medical community. The head of the neoconservative Atlantic Council wrote an editorial this week urging NATO to pass an Article 5 declaration of war against the COVID-19 virus! Are they going to send in tanks and drones to wipe out these microscopic enemies?

People should ask themselves whether this coronavirus “pandemic” could be a big hoax, with the actual danger of the disease massively exaggerated by those who seek to profit – financially or politically – from the ensuing panic.

That is not to say the disease is harmless. Without question people will die from coronavirus. Those in vulnerable categories should take precautions to limit their risk of exposure. But we have seen this movie before. Government over-hypes a threat as an excuse to grab more of our freedoms. When the “threat” is over, however, they never give us our freedoms back.

About the author: Ronald Ernest Paul (born August 20, 1935) is an American author, physician, and retired politician who served as the U.S. Representative for Texas’s 22nd congressional district from 1976 to 1977 and again from 1979 to 1985, and for Texas’s 14th congressional district from 1997 to 2013. On three occasions, he sought the presidency of the United States: as the Libertarian Party nominee in 1988 and as a candidate in the Republican primaries of 2008 and 2012.

Read more at ronpaulinstitute.org

__________________

**Comment**

Lyme/MSIDS is killing and maiming people all over the world but this same CDC/NIH doesn’t care and has followed the same script for over 40 years despite the growing pandemic. Why would we trust these people with a virus when we can’t trust them with a disease that is rambling forward year by year infecting thousands upon thousands?  They continue to give the same faulty tests, the same unscientific mono treatment, and continue to squash any doctor who dares to say otherwise.

Remember, the conflicts of interest within this group of authorities is a long rap-sheet: ConflictReport

64357008_10217935576008450_2638357839671721984_n

For more:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/21/study-shows-covid-19-testing-as-bad-as-lyme-msids-testing/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/16/does-the-coronavirus-exist/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/17/stunning-insights-into-the-corona-panic-by-dr-wolfgang-wodarg/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/19/revealed-basic-math-error-likely-cause-of-global-coronavirus-panic/

‘It’s Not the Exact Same Virus Everywhere in the World’

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/85500?xid=nl_mpt_DHE_2020-03- Video here

‘It’s Not the Exact Same Virus Everywhere in the World’

— Preprint manuscript suggests COVID-19 virus has already mutated into multiple strains

A preprint manuscript posted on medRxiv analyzed COVID-19 coronavirus samples from Sichuan province of China for sequence variation and evolution, to determine how rapidly the virus is mutating during its pandemic spread, and the unpredictable effects it is having on containment efforts.

In this exclusive video interview with Harlan Krumholz, MD, of Yale University School of Medicine, he discusses the paper and says “we need to realize this is a moving target.”

________________

**Comment**

I don’t post this to garner fear but rather to show something viruses do naturally – mutate.  I post this to show that this makes testing rather challenging as well as the fact you may have already had this virus and will never know it.  Testing for COVID-19 is abysmal – on par with Lyme/MSIDS testing.  

The following article does a great job of explaining viral shedding as well as the fact many vaccines cause this shedding, thereby infecting others exposed to the individual who got vaccinated.  Nobody seems to be thinking about this with a COVID-19 vaccine, but we sure should:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2019/08/05/what-is-vaccine-shedding/

In this article we see that the flu vaccine just last year was 9% effective against the current strain that popped up mid-season:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2019/07/10/cdc-admits-flu-vaccine-failed-91-of-the-time-against-current-flu-strain/  The question begging to be asked is what kind of vaccine effectiveness can be expected IF COVID-19 is mutating all over the place and is a “moving target?”

The numbers of COVID-19 cases are reporting via testing are inflated and based on false premises with arbitrary cut off points.
Research from China has shown the false positive rate to be over 50% and in some cases as high as 80%

Source:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/21/study-shows-covid-19-testing-as-bad-as-lyme-msids-testing/

Study Shows COVID-19 Testing As Bad As Lyme/MSIDS Testing

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32133832?

2020 Mar 5;41(4):485-488. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112338-20200221-00144. [Epub ahead of print]

Potential false-positive rate among the ‘asymptomatic infected individuals’ in close contacts of COVID-19 patients

[Article in Chinese; Abstract available in Chinese from the publisher]

Abstract

Objective: As the prevention and control of COVID-19 continues to advance, the active nucleic acid test screening in the close contacts of the patients has been carrying out in many parts of China. However, the false-positive rate of positive results in the screening has not been reported up to now. But to clearify the false-positive rate during screening is important in COVID-19 control and prevention.

Methods: Point values and reasonable ranges of the indicators which impact the false-positive rate of positive results were estimated based on the information available to us at present. The false-positive rate of positive results in the active screening was deduced, and univariate and multivariate-probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to understand the robustness of the findings.

Results: When the infection rate of the close contacts and the sensitivity and specificity of reported results were taken as the point estimates, the positive predictive value of the active screening was only 19.67%, in contrast, the false-positive rate of positive results was 80.33%. The multivariate-probabilistic sensitivity analysis results supported the base-case findings, with a 75% probability for the false-positive rate of positive results over 47%.

Conclusions: In the close contacts of COVID-19 patients, nearly half or even more of the ‘asymptomatic infected individuals’ reported in the active nucleic acid test screening might be false positives.

________________

**Comment**

Hopefully it is clear from this study that the prevalence of cases is far lower than is being reported if these tests are being used as predictors of infection.

This testing is as bad as Lyme/MSIDS testing and shouldn’t be taken seriously by anyone.  

**UPDATE, March 25, 2020**

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/25/new-dna-sequencing-test-for-covid-20-100-accurate-can-also-test-for-5-strains/

__________________________

Meanwhile, the CDC has developed a new PCR test which is also riddled with problems, intended for labs certified under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) to perform high complexity tests. (But other CLIA-certified labs doing testing for Lyme/MSIDS are called “home-brewed” by the CDC).  

They are also working on a new test which will detect antibodies https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/about/testing.html
The Lyme community is well aware of the short comings of antibody testing as this sort of testing has kept thousands from being diagnosed with tick-borne illness.

Regarding the problems with PCR testing, author David Crowe explains:

To use PCR as a test, you assume that you are starting with an unknown number of strands and end up with an exponential multiple after n cycles. From the quantity of materials at termination the starting quantity can be estimated. A major problem with this is that because PCR is an exponential (doubling) process, errors also grow exponentially.

The second problem is that the Coronavirus is believed to be composed of RNA, but this can be solved by converting all RNA into DNA with the Reverse Transcriptase enzyme at the start of the process.

The technology, after these two adaptations, is known as RT-PCR (Reverse Transcriptase PCR).

Now you have the information necessary to understand the numbers from 20-40 on the vertical axis of the graphs above. These are the number of cycles. It implies that it always took at least 20 PCR cycles before any RNA could be detected, and they stopped after a maximum of 37 cycles. The blue line is at cycle 38, and the black dots do not mean RNA was detected after 38 cycles (as clarified in the paper), but that it wasn’t detected by 37 cycles, and so the process terminated. This “Serial Cycle Threshold (Ct)” was the arbitrary definition of a negative result by the authors of reference [24].

We can see that it was arbitrary, because in another paper, reference [13], the authors had two end points: 37 and 40. Anything less than 37 was considered positive and anything 40 or greater was defined as negative. The in-between values were re-tested and re-interpreted. Note that this paper would treat 37 as indeterminate but the Singapore paper would treat it as positive.  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/16/does-the-coronavirus-exist/

His paper goes on to show many people testing positive, then negative, then positive again.  Results were all over the place.  Regarding antibody cut off points, the Lyme/MSIDS community again, is all too aware of how this has kept people from being diagnosed, only instead of false positives as in COVID-19 testing, it’s false negatives that are killing Lyme patients.  False positives only serve those who want to show high numbers of infected people.

Recently I posted a video of Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, pulmonologist, epidemiologist, and past chairman of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Health Committee.  He states the following on his website, regarding testing:

Without PCR-Tests there would be no reason for special alarms.

We are currently not measuring the incidence of coronavirus diseases, but the activity of the specialists searching for them.https://www.wodarg.com

BTW, Wodarg is the one who pointed out the Swine flu hoax and states this:

We have experienced similar alarmist actions by virologists in the last two decades. WHO’s “swine flu pandemic” was in fact one of the mildest flu waves in history and it is not only migratory birds that are still waiting for “birds flu”. Many institutions that are now again alerting us to the need for caution have let us down and failed us on several occasions. Far too often, they are institutionally corrupted by secondary interests from business and/or politics.  https://www.wodarg.com

Lastly, he states

It is a well-known fact that in every “flu wave” 7-15% of acute respiratory illnesses (ARI) are coming along with coronaviruses, the case numbers that are now continuously added up are still completely within the normal range.  https://www.wodarg.com

Regarding nucleic acid testing (NAT) used in the study, this article explains the benefits and constraints of such tests:  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3943139/
NAT technique is highly sensitive and specific for viral nucleic acids. It is based on amplification of targeted regions of viral ribonucleic acid or deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and detects them earlier than the other screening methods thus, narrowing the window period of HIV, HBV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections.
According to the article, these are the downsides of NAT:
  • highly technically demanding
  • high cost
  • dedicated infrastructure facility
  • equipment
  • consumables
  • technical expertise
  • And lastly, at least regarding COVID-19 – the high false positive rate

And then, the latest attention grab is COVID-19 testing is that is supposed to give results within 45 minutes, such as this one from Cepheid:  https://www.cepheid.com/coronavirus.  The problem is, if the test is inaccurate to begin with, getting the results quicker isn’t any more helpful.  We are told here by a Yale MD that COVID-19 is mutating:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/21/its-not-the-exact-same-virus-everywhere-in-the-world/

Current tests only detects SARS-CoV-2.

Recently this frightening article came out on how tests were contaminated WITH COVID-19:  https://www-standard-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-test-kits-contaminated-covid-19-a4403021.html?amp

Hopefully this demonstrates that the numbers floating out there are all based upon faulty testing – just like Lyme/MSIDS.  Again, I’m not saying people don’t die of viruses – they do – and they always have and most probably always will.  But, this thing is being blown up to monster proportions when frankly, they haven’t a clue on prevalence.

I hope that the World Health Organization and White House Coronavirus Task Force takes Lee up on his offer to retest borderline or questionable positive coronavirus samples as the high false positive rate is causing undue panic and unconstitutional measures by governments.