Official COVID-19 Infection Rates – A Systemic Problem
Updated: Aug 1
May 2, 2020
Good morning, today I want to bring your attention to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel. This is the foundational document for testing, straight from the CDC. I cannot take credit for knowing where to look. That credit goes to Jon Rappoport. That’s right, this little gem came from my free subscription to ‘No More Fake News’. You can go to my links page to sign up there. It’s free.
Your first question is probably, “How do you know this is for real?” Well people, here is the link, straight from the CDC’s official website. Though the actual link comes from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, it is taken from the CDC’s official website.
Go to page 2 of the document (page 3 of the pdf), under the title Intended Use. Now look at the second paragraph, specifically sentences 3 and 4 which state, “Positive results are indicative of active infection with 2019-nCoV but do not rule out bacterial infection or co-infection with other viruses. The agent detected may not be the definite cause of disease.” Slowly read that again. Go ahead and read it a third time…a little slower. My friends, that is what is known as a “rabbit hole”. And yet, the CDC is ordering labs to report a positive test result to public health agencies where it will be counted as a “coronavirus case”...a little problematic when displaying infection rates, wouldn't you agree? I'd like to know the current statistics on false-positives. How bad is it?
And this - https://www.goodrx.com/blog/coronavirus-covid-19-testing-updates-methods-cost-availability/ - Here take note of the headers “How accurate are molecular coronavirus tests?” and “How accurate are serological tests?”
And this - https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/04/15/834497497/antibody-tests-for-coronavirus-can-miss-the-mark - From NPR - Priceless…
Finally this, with no sugar coating 😊 ~ https://vaccineimpact.com/2020/do-we-actually-have-a-test-that-can-accurately-identify-a-covid-19-virus/
And on and on and on. So, when your face is super glued to your television screen and (as of May 1, 2020), you see an official US total infection of 1,062,446 (from the CDC), and you consider the information I just gave you DIRECTLY FROM THE CDC, do you see the problem? Do you see the problem? Do you see the huge problem here?
Is the CDC liable for this fictitious number? No, how could they be? They have publicly told scientists and the healthcare industry that the test is unreliable. On top of that, everyone (except mainstream news of course) seems to be dancing around the idea that the test shouldn’t be used at all, let alone be a reason to put 50 million people out of work. Yet if they were taken to court, I do not believe they could be held liable. The fallacy of the test is written right in the official CDC Covid-19 testing manual in black and white.
Today’s bonus - Ben Swann’s tried and true method of following the money. Excellent. https://www.facebook.com/BenSwannRealityCheck/videos/263875434789894/
P.S. - If you have questions, please send them to firstname.lastname@example.org and I may just do a blog entry for your question. Also, make sure and hit the 'subscribe' button and enter your information. You'll get notified every time I update my blog. Happy hunting. Have a good weekend. Much love, Randy