Posted on 03/28/2025 1:09:54 AM PDT by ransomnote
https://x.com/TonySeruga/status/1890926738458517785
Tony Seruga
@TonySeruga
·
Feb 15
I warned this was going to happen and they are on track.Labcorp has ramped up FAKE fraudulent Bird Flu tests in the U.S.
Once again, we are literally using PCR process to create pandemics on demand.
PCR is not a diagnostic test, it is a DNA amplification PROCESS. Nothing more.
I wonder if this news will trigger a run on Labcorp stock.
Any opinions?
Bkmk
the inventor, rest his soul, would likely not be thrilled his invention being used like this, but it may be partly why he isn’t still with us.
Is fake fraudulent a double negative?
Related:
Egg 🥚 prices are not by accident:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4300121/posts
And not specifically related to bird flu, but a most excellent interview with a cancer doctor/researcher/billionaire by Tucker Carlson regarding cancer, Tcell immunization, Covid, the Covid “vax” and the deep state:
https://youtu.be/mgZaT-OriO8?si=PVxh9n80TJFe5BZJ
Is fake fraudulent a double negative?
It is quite peculiar bird flu and COVID respects borders now. No bird flu in Mexico and 70% of Worldwide COVID deaths are in the USA this year.
Please help me out here. What part of your post (and of Mr. Seruga’s) indicates the lab tests are fake? What did I miss?
Bookmark
Needs a comma.
Bingo!
\/
maybe an analogy will help you understand
it is not a guitar tuner that determines if the note is a or g
it is a guitar amplifier that will take 1 decibel molehill non threat to health
and make it 1000 decibel mountain .
Yes and? Not that different conceptually from when they would swab your throat 40 years ago, then put the swab in a petri dish, and wait a day to see what grew. Easier to detect strep after you give it some time to grow and reproduce - same with virus. They are small, there isn’t a lot of it in a sample, so you grow or reproduce it to make it easier to see.
In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Labcorp has ramped up FAKE fraudulent Bird Flu tests in the U.S. | the PCR process is not a diagnostic test, but is used to create pandemics on demand. , Apparatchik wrote: Please help me out here. What part of your post (and of Mr. Seruga’s) indicates the lab tests are fake? What did I miss?
It's background information to which Sergua is referring. The inventor of the PCR assay said that it could not diagnose any disease. Kary Mullis (inventor) said it was a laboratory tool used to basically find a needle in a haystack (not his words - he said find minute amounts of material in a sample that would otherwise be missed).
So the CDC and World Health Organization picked up a laboratory tool and misused it as a diagnostic tool. Finding a miniscule amount of something doesn't mean the person ever became ill with the disease in question.
Further, the CDC did not design the PCR to identify the Covid19 virus because, according to the CDC, isolated samples of the Covid 19 virus were 'not available.' So according to the CDC's documentation, the PCR was based on (sought to identify) a 'related coronavirus'. However, the CDC had already told the public that the Covid 19 virus was unlike any virus our bodies had been exposed to before.
Then, the PCR assay has limits because if subjected to too many cycles (centrifuge) the samples in question just break down to building blocks of genetic material. There's a clip of Anthony Fauci saying dismissively, "Well, anything over 25 cycles" would just result in building blocks of material, nothing that could be identifiable.
This invalid PCR 'test', based on its design, would have a very high error rate. But the fact that it was identifying (supposedly) a 'related Corona Virus' meant that it had a 100% false positive rate.
Unfortunately, the people who developed the Covid 'vaccine' used the PCR 'test' to prove the 'vaccine' was working. It's all a mess. It has to mean that the 'vaccines' were not valid and the fact that they don't prevent illness would indicate that.
So when Seruga heard that there's a bird flu 'vax' he posted about the fact that its fake.
I do recall reading and watching pieces showing that school kids tested the PCR on orange juice and it was 'positive' for Covid. There were videos online showing how to fake out a Covid test so you could stay home from work.
But early in the Plandemic, the President of Zimbabwe had his scientists try the Covid 'test' on Kiwi, goats, motor oil etc. and the results showed that the PCR was not reliable.
But, during the pandemic, this unreliable lab assay being used as a diagnostic 'test' determind whether you were detained in a hospital for being contagious, whether you were denied treatment for your respiratory disease, whether you were given organ killing Remdesivir, whether you are locked down in your home or prevented from travel etc.
Is the fraudulence fake? Is the Bird Flu fraudulent, or is it the tests? Terrible headline. I apologize for griping about grammar on a serious thread, but.... It’s so sad what has become of our language now that everyone who can type and click can also publish.
p
IBTFR$$ ... FR $hot $hills ...
“PCR is not a diagnostic test, it is a DNA amplification PROCESS. Nothing more.”
Not true. PCR is used as a diagnostic tool because it can detect the presence of DNA specific to a pathogen, therefore if the DNA is present the pathogen (target DNA) is present. That is about as simple as I can explain it. You can also tell how much of the target DNA is present by how many copy cycles it takes to give a detectable signal. If it takes a large number of cycles there was very little of the pathogen. If it only takes a few there a lot of the infectious organism is present. Back when I started doing PCR it was easy to get false positive results, these days it is much easier because there are computer programs to help identify the right primers/temperatures/cycle times etc.
Just a FYI on Ivermectin.
Arkansas Governor’s Signature Makes OTC Ivermectin a Reality
https://armoneyandpolitics.com/arkansas-otc-ivermectin/
On March 25, Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed into law a measure that made ivermectin available over the counter in pharmacies.
Ivermectin gained widespread recognition and no small dose of controversy during the COVID-19 pandemic when it was touted as an effective alternative treatment. The drug became a flashpoint in the debate over the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
