How did this occur then:
Dr. Derick Knauss on the identity of the virus and on the failures of the PCR test are corroborated by numerous scientific studies including the WHO.
I have a PhD in virology and immunology. I’m a clinical lab scientist and have tested 1500 “supposed” positive Covid 19 samples collected here in S. California.
When my lab team and I did the testing through Koch’s postulates and observation under a SEM (scanning electron microscope), we found NO Covid in any of the 1500 samples.
What we found was that all of the 1500 samples were mostly Influenza A and some were influenza B, but not a single case of Covid, and we did not use the B.S. PCR test.
We then sent the remainder of the samples to Stanford, Cornell, and a few of the University of California labs and they found the same results as we did, NO COVID. They found influenza A and B. All of us then spoke to the CDC and asked for viable samples of COVID, which CDC said they could not provide as they did not have any samples.
...............
While SARS-CoV-2 –namely the the virus which is said to cause COVID-19 (categorized as a disease), was isolated in a laboratory test in January 2020, the RT-PCR test does not identify/ detect the virus. What it detects are fragments of viri. According to renowned Swiss immunologist Dr B. Stadler
So if we do a PCR corona test on an immune person, it is not a virus that is detected, but a small shattered part of the viral genome. The test comes back positive for as long as there are tiny shattered parts of the virus left. Even if the infectious viri are long dead, a corona test can come back positive, because the PCR method multiplies even a tiny fraction of the viral genetic material enough [to be detected].
The Question is Positive for What?? The PCR test does not detect the identity of the virus, According to Dr. Pascal Sacré,
these tests detect viral particles, genetic sequences, not the whole virus.
In an attempt to quantify the viral load, these sequences are then amplified several times through numerous complex steps that are subject to errors, sterility errors and contamination.
Positive RT-PCR is not synonymous with COVID-19 disease! PCR specialists make it clear that a test must always be compared with the clinical record of the patient being tested, with the patient’s state of health to confirm its value [reliability]
As for the first part, I can’t find any “Dr. Derick Knauss” anywhere, and the only reference to “Dr. Dereck Knauss” I can find is on conspiracy theory websites. No professional presence anywhere on the Internet. No personal presence. No social media. Far as I can tell, this person doesn’t even exist. If we can clear that part up, I’d be happy to look more into those claims, but so far it doesn’t even look like the claims are from a real person.
As for the second part, that’s exactly what I said: the RT-PCR test looks for the specific sequences of genetic code only ever found in SARS-CoV-2. It’s literally triggering on the genetic sequences that differentiate SARS-CoV-2 from all other viruses. Which is precisely why it can’t be triggered by other viruses, even if they’re similar (and Influenza is not similar).
And the RT-PCR test also does not test for viral load. That isn’t its purpose. No one has ever claimed otherwise. It tests for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 at the point of collection (typically the nasal cavity, sometimes the throat, and if you’re in China, your backside).
““I don’t think you can misuse PCR. [It is] the results; the interpretation of it. If they can find this virus in you at all – and with PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody.”” - -Kary Mullis (inventer of PCR)
PCR1
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3920274/posts?page=40#40
PCR2
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3920560/posts?page=25#25