Share this page!

TNK 🙂 Profile picture
Twitter logo
10 Jan, 5 tweets, 3 min read
“We fail to find strong evidence supporting restrictive measures”

New peer reviewed study finds little benefit, and potential harm to elderly, of restrictive lockdown measures.

Recall that NO health agency recommended lockdowns before 2020.
Due to the proven immense human costs of lockdowns, there must be overwhelming evidence that they have a significant public health benefit. There is none. Just one recent example of the terrible costs:
Another viewpoint on this study from the UK
Another viewpoint from Canada
And to wrap it all up with a nice “red” bow, read this letter to the FBI and others tying it all back to The CCP.

Guess who has had the best economy this year setting new records.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with TNK 🙂

TNK 🙂 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @TTBikeFit

TNK 🙂 Profile picture
15 Dec 20
More important findings from the newly uncovered RI PCR test Ct data!

Recall I previously showed the Ct values of more than 5000 C19 PCR tests from the RI state health lab. Here they are again color coded for estimated infectivity. While all these folks were “positive”...
The green folks were likely not infective and the yellows may not have been. The higher the Ct score, the lower the viral load - the person is “less sick” or has remnant viral rna which can be detected for months while infectivity lasts maybe a week.
Yet it is nearly impossible to obtain Ct score data! Go ahead and ask for it- you will likely get a blank stare or a weak excuse about authorization or data storage. But you won’t get your Ct score. Ridiculous.
Read 8 tweets
TNK 🙂 Profile picture
11 Dec 20
PCR Ct data revealed! For the first time we get a look at the Ct values from a state health lab - these cover March-June 2020. First the scatter of all 5036 positive tests:
Next we look at the distribution of Ct values for all tests:
Finally, the temporal shift in percentage of tests with Ct > 32 (arguably a fair cutoff for infectious viral loads).
Read 8 tweets
TNK 🙂 Profile picture
8 Dec 20
“The Fable of the Ant and the Ct40 PCR Test”

Or, an easy way to understand the problems with and damage done by PCR tests for COVID-19
You've probably heard of PCR tests, which are by far the most widely used for COVID-19. Yet many of us are saying that positive PCR test results - “cases” - do not reflect actual viral infections accurately. Why? Read on for a simple analogy...
Let's say there has been a big problem with houses becoming infested with ants [people infected with c19] in your neighborhood. The government says you should get tested for ants [C19] because your ants might "silently spread" to other houses! Scary!
Read 19 tweets
TNK 🙂 Profile picture
3 Dec 20
Bombshell study (meta review) from Oxford just published on PCR testing, Ct and virus viability.

💥This study completely invalidates the current c19 PCR test data💥

Recall that invalid test results also flow into hospitalization and fatality stats.

For key takeaways, read on Image
No viable virus at >7days from symptom onset.

Yet at this time Median Ct was still 26.5- MUCH lower than used in widespread testing.

And at 21 days, 2 weeks beyond transmissibility Ct was still 35! Still below that required to test positive most everywhere! Image
The chances of detecting live virus decreased by 33% with each increment in Ct. Image
Read 11 tweets
TNK 🙂 Profile picture
2 Dec 20
Breaking: No one tested at RI’s airport has COVID! 1% of those tested did however have “FalsePositive19”, the pandemic sweeping the world! Officials warned travelers that they “should be ashamed” that they contracted FP19. 1/6 wpri.com/target-12/11-t…
Meanwhile officials admonish public to “stay home but also to get tested”. The DOH director noted that “if folks don’t get tested, we won’t know how many have FP19. Furthermore, hospitals are filling up with FP19 patients.” (Fact check: 22% of avail beds). 2/6
The Binax Now Rapid Antigen test used at the airport has a 1-2% specificity= false positive rate. Hence any perfectly healthy pop tested with Binax will show 1-2% FP19! Just like the airport. 3/6
Read 7 tweets
TNK 🙂 Profile picture
21 Nov 20
Two new studies today effectively destroying the gov’s response to C19.

✅Stringent measures have no correlation to outcome

✅No evidence of asymptomatic spread.

Banish the myths of lockdown effectiveness and “silent spread” and we are back to normal.
First, this study shows death rates were influenced by factors like geography and elderly population (life expectancy) but NOT by stringency of Gov imposed measures frontiersin.org/articles/10.33…
Second, a study of 10M (!) folks post lockdown in China showed ZERO transmission from asymptomatic individuals.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @TTBikeFit has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @TTBikeFit!

Read all threads by @TTBikeFit