Time to defund the CDC?
They violated accepted labratory practices when creating the COVID-19 test kits,
The cross contamination most likely occurred because chemical mixtures were assembled into the kits within a lab space that was also handling synthetic coronavirus material. The scientists also said the proximity deviated from accepted procedures and jeopardized testing for the virus.
CDC officials took more than a month to remove the unnecessary step from the kits, exacerbating nationwide delays in testing, according to an examination of federal documents and interviews with more than 30 present and former federal scientists and others familiar with the events.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/contam...r-BB12Q90W
(04-20-2020, 08:39 AM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Just the flu
The same or less in 99% of known cases, which coupled with testing concerns and emerging titers testing further proves the point. Millions have had it, only a small percentage have died or will die. The difference from flu is our overreaction to it.
(04-20-2020, 12:16 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (04-20-2020, 10:59 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]The same or less in 99% of known cases, which coupled with testing concerns and emerging titers testing further proves the point. Millions have had it, only a small percentage have died or will die. The difference from flu is our overreaction to it. how many people can spread it without showing symptoms, and thus how far and wide it will spread without social distancing controls.
FTFY
No, I was right the first time.
(04-20-2020, 07:31 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ] (04-19-2020, 09:02 PM)jagfan0728 Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGbYHJcMbz8
Rashid Buttar is an American osteopathic physician from Charlotte, North Carolina. He is known for his controversial use of chelation therapy for numerous conditions, including autism and cancer.[1] He has been reprimanded by the North Carolina Board of Medical Examiners for unethical treatment of patients.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashid_Buttar
How dare he try something outside the mainstream and then establishment goes after him.
Ever heard of the doctor who falsely diagnosed people with cancer and made them sick and even killed some of them with the cancer treatments when they didn't even have cancer. It's not cancer that makes your hair fall out, it's the treatment. It's never a good thing to have cancer, but when the treatment alone can kill someone, it makes you wonder. Two of the primary ways we treat cancer are undoubtedly harmful. Chemo is chemical poisoning of cancer but it affects healthy cells as well. Radiation is essentially the burning of cancer, but if not targeted it will affect healthy cells as well and even make them cancerous. That's the best we have? Surgery is another option and certainly the least harmful, but not without risks. Do any of the three treatments address the root cause of disease? Of course not.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/farid-fata-...nt-doctor/
(04-20-2020, 01:38 PM)jagfan0728 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-20-2020, 07:31 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]Rashid Buttar is an American osteopathic physician from Charlotte, North Carolina. He is known for his controversial use of chelation therapy for numerous conditions, including autism and cancer.[1] He has been reprimanded by the North Carolina Board of Medical Examiners for unethical treatment of patients.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashid_Buttar
How dare he try something outside the mainstream and then establishment goes after him.
Ever heard of the doctor who falsely diagnosed people with cancer and made them sick and even killed some of them with the cancer treatments when they didn't even have cancer. It's not cancer that makes your hair fall out, it's the treatment. It's never a good thing to have cancer, but when the treatment alone can kill someone, it makes you wonder. Two of the primary ways we treat cancer are undoubtedly harmful. Chemo is chemical poisoning of cancer but it affects healthy cells as well. Radiation is essentially the burning of cancer, but if not targeted it will affect healthy cells as well and even make them cancerous. That's the best we have? Surgery is another option and certainly the least harmful, but not without risks. Do any of the three treatments address the root cause of disease? Of course not.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/farid-fata-...nt-doctor/
They don't care about addressing the root cause of disease because there is no money in that.
(04-20-2020, 10:59 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (04-20-2020, 08:39 AM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Just the flu
The same or less in 99% of known cases, which coupled with testing concerns and emerging titers testing further proves the point. Millions have had it, only a small percentage have died or will die. The difference from flu is our overreaction to it.
I tend to agree. I think that the major difference is in the way that it's treated and the lack of a vaccine.
As far as the overreaction, I blame that more on the media (both traditional and social). Sure measures needed to be taken to slow the spread of it, but some of the draconian measures taken by government at all levels is pushing it as far as our rights under The Constitution.
(04-20-2020, 02:28 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (04-20-2020, 01:47 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]They don't care about addressing the root cause of disease because there is no money in that.
Oh such bull [BLEEP].
(04-20-2020, 02:11 PM)jagfan0728 Wrote: [ -> ]It's the truth.
Bull [BLEEP].
Make your bed with libertarians, wake up with conspiracy nuts.
(04-20-2020, 02:31 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (04-20-2020, 02:28 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Oh such bull [BLEEP].
Bull [BLEEP].
Make your bed with libertarians, wake up with conspiracy nuts.
There's one in every crowd.
The last thing the cancer industry wants is a cure for cancer. They currently receive some $4.95 billion /year for research.
There are dozens of new cancer treatment centers carrying billions in debt. A cancer cure would render those debts unpayable. Bankster bonuses might be affected.
(04-20-2020, 03:14 PM)Byron LeftTown Wrote: [ -> ]The last thing the cancer industry wants is a cure for cancer. They currently receive some $4.95 billion /year for research.
There are dozens of new cancer treatment centers carrying billions in debt. A cancer cure would render those debts unpayable. Bankster bonuses might be affected.
Man. You must really think people are evil.
(04-20-2020, 03:14 PM)Byron LeftTown Wrote: [ -> ]The last thing the cancer industry wants is a cure for cancer. They currently receive some $4.95 billion /year for research.
There are dozens of new cancer treatment centers carrying billions in debt. A cancer cure would render those debts unpayable. Bankster bonuses might be affected.
And there he is!
Question #1 - How many cancers are there?
Question #2 - How many of them have cures?
Question #3 - How many new types of cancer emerge each year?
Question #4 - What are the trends in mortality rates for established cancers over the past 30 years?
"No one wants to cure cancer." Christ that is horrifically stupid.
Just a follow-up: the wife and I both got tested (her for the 3rd time, me for the first) on Friday.
This will come as a surprise to nobody - I tested negative. Until a widely-available antibody test is available, I won't know if I'm simply immune to CV19 or I had it and my superior genetics curb stomped it.
Perhaps a surprise to everybody - my wife still tested positive. A full 6 weeks from her original test-date, 7-8 weeks from her original symptoms. PCP said that they're increasingly seeing more & more that people are testing positive up to 6 weeks after last showings of symptoms.
Extrapolate that as you see fit.
A picture is worth 1000 words...
![[Image: IMG_20200420_120524.jpg]](https://www.brinkleys.org/users/tsl/Files/IMG_20200420_120524.jpg)
(04-20-2020, 03:20 PM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ]Just a follow-up: the wife and I both got tested (her for the 3rd time, me for the first) on Friday.
This will come as a surprise to nobody - I tested negative. Until a widely-available antibody test is available, I won't know if I'm simply immune to CV19 or I had it and my superior genetics curb stomped it.
Perhaps a surprise to everybody - my wife still tested positive. A full 6 weeks from her original test-date, 7-8 weeks from her original symptoms. PCP said that they're increasingly seeing more & more that people are testing positive up to 6 weeks after last showings of symptoms.
Extrapolate that as you see fit.
I appreciate you sharing this. This brings the tests into serious question, which some people have raised red flags about long ago. A supposedly highly contagious disease was unable to infect you over a period of six weeks. The PCR test was never meant to be used as a diagnostic as the inventor of the test, Kary Mullis, said himself. And all data on infections and even deaths are based on the assumption that these tests are accurate and test only for COVID-19.
Now for the bad news. What is the test they claim to use to identify this new bug in a patient? The test is called PCR. This is the classic polymerase chain reaction test, invented in the 80s by Dr Kary Mullis. In 40 years doctors have never come up with any test more accurate than this very flawed, theoretical estimate of microbial activity.- The test produces loads of false positives, often failing to measure anything at all.
- No one is more critical of the test’s reliability than the inventor himself.
- Dr Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel prize for inventing PCR to detect HIV, [9] explains its limitations—why the PCR is not especially diagnostic, for HIV or for anything else:
“Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron. PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers. Although there is a common misimpression that the viral-load tests actually count the number of viruses in the blood, these tests cannot detect free, infectious viruses at all; they can only detect proteins that are believed, in some cases wrongly, to be unique to HIV.
“The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves.” [9]
Can’t identify viruses? Then how do we know all these people have the same disease, let alone the same novel disease? This means that with all these people who have supposedly been PCR tested for COVID, there is still no conclusive diagnostic evidence that they have any coronaviruses at all. Let alone the same virus. According to the inventor of the primary diagnostic test. (Mullis’s testimony about the limits of PCR actually helped acquit OJ. Though Johnny didn’t seem to need much help there, did he?)
https://ttfuture.org/blog/michael/why-co...-overnight
(04-20-2020, 04:29 PM)jagfan0728 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-20-2020, 03:20 PM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ]Just a follow-up: the wife and I both got tested (her for the 3rd time, me for the first) on Friday.
This will come as a surprise to nobody - I tested negative. Until a widely-available antibody test is available, I won't know if I'm simply immune to CV19 or I had it and my superior genetics curb stomped it.
Perhaps a surprise to everybody - my wife still tested positive. A full 6 weeks from her original test-date, 7-8 weeks from her original symptoms. PCP said that they're increasingly seeing more & more that people are testing positive up to 6 weeks after last showings of symptoms.
Extrapolate that as you see fit.
I appreciate you sharing this. This brings the tests into serious question, which some people have raised red flags about long ago. A supposedly highly contagious disease was unable to infect you over a period of six weeks. The PCR test was never meant to be used as a diagnostic as the inventor of the test, Kary Mullis, said himself. And all data on infections and even deaths are based on the assumption that these tests are accurate and test only for COVID-19.
Now for the bad news. What is the test they claim to use to identify this new bug in a patient? The test is called PCR. This is the classic polymerase chain reaction test, invented in the 80s by Dr Kary Mullis. In 40 years doctors have never come up with any test more accurate than this very flawed, theoretical estimate of microbial activity.- The test produces loads of false positives, often failing to measure anything at all.
- No one is more critical of the test’s reliability than the inventor himself.
- Dr Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel prize for inventing PCR to detect HIV, [9] explains its limitations—why the PCR is not especially diagnostic, for HIV or for anything else:
“Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron. PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers. Although there is a common misimpression that the viral-load tests actually count the number of viruses in the blood, these tests cannot detect free, infectious viruses at all; they can only detect proteins that are believed, in some cases wrongly, to be unique to HIV.
“The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves.” [9]
Can’t identify viruses? Then how do we know all these people have the same disease, let alone the same novel disease? This means that with all these people who have supposedly been PCR tested for COVID, there is still no conclusive diagnostic evidence that they have any coronaviruses at all. Let alone the same virus. According to the inventor of the primary diagnostic test. (Mullis’s testimony about the limits of PCR actually helped acquit OJ. Though Johnny didn’t seem to need much help there, did he?)
https://ttfuture.org/blog/michael/why-co...-overnight
That's a big jump simply from me testing negative. I was informed that while I tested negative, it's possible that I'm still a carrier. Until antibody tests can correlate a negative with a positive, there's not really any full way of knowing if I'm virus free, just asymptomatic. I could have had the virus as early as mid-Feb. I won't know until the aforementioned antibody tests are available in greater numbers.
My assertion is that people being contagious for almost two months after their initial contraction of CV19 is something being drastically overlooked, currently - especially with the push for everything to get back to normal ASAP.
Anyone having issues checking the Florida Dept. of Healths website? I know there other good sites but grown used to theirs.
(04-20-2020, 04:41 PM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ] (04-20-2020, 04:29 PM)jagfan0728 Wrote: [ -> ]I appreciate you sharing this. This brings the tests into serious question, which some people have raised red flags about long ago. A supposedly highly contagious disease was unable to infect you over a period of six weeks. The PCR test was never meant to be used as a diagnostic as the inventor of the test, Kary Mullis, said himself. And all data on infections and even deaths are based on the assumption that these tests are accurate and test only for COVID-19.
Now for the bad news. What is the test they claim to use to identify this new bug in a patient? The test is called PCR. This is the classic polymerase chain reaction test, invented in the 80s by Dr Kary Mullis. In 40 years doctors have never come up with any test more accurate than this very flawed, theoretical estimate of microbial activity.- The test produces loads of false positives, often failing to measure anything at all.
- No one is more critical of the test’s reliability than the inventor himself.
- Dr Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel prize for inventing PCR to detect HIV, [9] explains its limitations—why the PCR is not especially diagnostic, for HIV or for anything else:
“Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron. PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers. Although there is a common misimpression that the viral-load tests actually count the number of viruses in the blood, these tests cannot detect free, infectious viruses at all; they can only detect proteins that are believed, in some cases wrongly, to be unique to HIV.
“The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves.” [9]
Can’t identify viruses? Then how do we know all these people have the same disease, let alone the same novel disease? This means that with all these people who have supposedly been PCR tested for COVID, there is still no conclusive diagnostic evidence that they have any coronaviruses at all. Let alone the same virus. According to the inventor of the primary diagnostic test. (Mullis’s testimony about the limits of PCR actually helped acquit OJ. Though Johnny didn’t seem to need much help there, did he?)
https://ttfuture.org/blog/michael/why-co...-overnight
That's a big jump simply from me testing negative. I was informed that while I tested negative, it's possible that I'm still a carrier. Until antibody tests can correlate a negative with a positive, there's not really any full way of knowing if I'm virus free, just asymptomatic. I could have had the virus as early as mid-Feb. I won't know until the aforementioned antibody tests are available in greater numbers.
My assertion is that people being contagious for almost two months after their initial contraction of CV19 is something being drastically overlooked, currently - especially with the push for everything to get back to normal ASAP.
And yet projections of cases, deaths, resource utilization all continue to plummet. The more we know the less we have to worry about with this thing because it turning out that everyone's had it at some point the last 4 to 6 months. If you assertion was real concern then we'd have the millions dead they forecasted.