For your reading pleasure!
1. These are not peer reviewed journals — they are open sourced journals and fail “peer review”. The “peer review” per the website. The journal does not appear to be a journal as there is no in print circulation. We might as well call Q threads peer reviewed journals as it has the same stringent standards (confirmation bias, and it is “published” on the internet)
2. The linkage between PCR testing and vaccine efficacy is junk science. The actual science behind this is jibberish. But the headline confirms many people’s bias. This is hardly a smoking gun
3. I notice that in typical scientific method, no one has published the actual peer reviewed journal Ivermectin study that everyone who was against vaccination was breathlessly trumpeting earlier this year. A RCT (double blind) showed no statistical significance in time to recovery or death in patients randomized for early treatment to Ivermectin or placebo. It checked all the boxes, early treatment, CoVID (+), RCT. I was wondering if someone would post it — but of course not
3. As a poster down thread states — this blog posting does not state what journal it is in, and generally when one has to hunt for the source publication it is ot all that credible
Thank you for pinging me and letting me know about this article. It is an excellenct example of false authority and confirmational bias.
Have a happy Wednesday!
….. This work is some of the finest of Dr. Lee's career. In this study, Dr. Lee not only reports that he has verified false positives due to the misapplication of RT-PCR testing:
“PCR was invented to replicate, or to amplify, a target segment of DNA for DNA sequencing without going through a laborious bacterial cloning. PCR needs a pair of primers, single-stranded DNAs of about 20 bases long, to define the segment of target DNA to be replicated. But PCR primer/template hybridization is not fully sequence-specific because PCR primers may attach to nontarget DNAs and amplify unwanted DNAs if these DNAs are present and partially match the primers in nucleotide sequence. As a result, relying on PCR, especially the qPCR technology using Ct numbers as the surrogate for actual PCR product analysis, for disease diagnosis is bound to generate false positives. The experimental results of this work emphasize that while RT-qPCR is generating a significant number of false-positive test results at the current stage of the COVID-19 pandemic…”
He also provides this harrowing conclusion:
“The COVID-19 pandemic could have been avoided or curtailed by using the SARSCoV-1 specific RT-PCR primers in early 2020.” ….
https://popularrationalism.substack.com/p/peer-reviewed-study-confirms-fatal
I’ll save time, for any lazies, and, post that link, here….