Thread by @PerpetualValue

I have serious doubts about the reliability of the PCR tests, which have a huge impact on society.

I am not a microbiologist but I was invested in PCR-testing companies and I found major red flags.

A thread.

#NCYT #ALERS #ALBIO

1/

PCR-tests have created enormous wealth for pre-pandemic shareholders of PCR-testing companies.

For example, Novacyt, one of the first to deliver PCR tests in Europe, was trading at just 8 cents in November 2019. Now trading around 9 euros.

2/

PCR Tests have a huge influence on life. The tests are being used regularly for screening of doctors, nurses and travelers for example. Besides, the tests are being used for mass-testing the population.
Totalitarian Government policy is also justified by PCR positive cases.
3/

PCR is a method to amplify DNA exponentially. Every cycle the amount of DNA doubles. The Cycle Treshold (Ct) is the number of cycles until sufficient viral detection is found. This parameter is essential for the binary outcome whether sufficient ‘viral load’ is found.
4/

In Nov 2020 the Portuguese Tribunal concluded: In view of current scientific evidence, this test shows itself to be unable to determine beyond reasonable doubt that such positivity corresponds, in fact, to the infection of a person by the SARS-CoV-2

portugalresident.com/judges-in-port…
5/

The Case can be found here:

drive.google.com/file/d/1t1b01H…
6/

The English translation can be found here:

translate.google.com/translate?hl=&…
7/

This Oxford paper concludes that at Ct=35, <3% of viral cultures are positive (infectious). That means >97% would be Non-infectious, i.e. False Positives

academic.oup.com/cid/advance-ar…
8/

Also see this study from Oxford:

“Two studies reported the odds of live virus culture reduced by approximately 33% for every one unit increase in Ct.”

“Complete live viruses are necessary for transmission, not the fragments identified by PCR”

academic.oup.com/cid/advance-ar…

9/

The Case was not even covered by MSM. Think of the nurses and doctors who need to do regular screening. If found positive with huge Ct, these people need to quarantine, while not necessary. Creating self-inflicted capacity problems in healthcare. Huge damage for society.
10/

It gets worse. The judges were at risk of 'being disciplined'.

The Portugese judges used some of the leading European and world specialists in this material published by the Oxford Academic at the end of September.

Scary world.

Independence?

portugalresident.com/portuguese-jud…
11/

I started doing more research in the PCR tests.

The PCR tests are recommended as ‘Golden Standard’ by the WHO.

The WHO PCR test protocol was based on the Drosten paper. Published by @Eurosurveillanc, part of ECDC and therefore funded by the EU.

eurosurveillance.org/content/10.280…

12/

There are major red flags with this publication.
-Major scientific flaws
-Conflicts of interests
-Peer review done in 24 hours
-Authors also in the Board of @Eurosurveillanc
-WHO accepted the paper as PCR protocol even before publication
13/

@waukema analyzed all 1,595 publications since 2015.
No Research paper got reviewed and accepted in <20 days.
Average 2019: 172 days
Average 2020: 97
14/

Co-Author Olfert Landt is CEO of TIB-Molbiol.

“by Jan. 10 he’d introduced a viable test kit. His phone hasn’t stopped ringing since.”
“Everyone here is putting in 12- to 14-hour shifts,”
"TIB’s revenue in February tripled from the same month in 2019"
bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
15

A Group of Scientists in Life Sciences wrote a Retraction Request given the severe damage on society with a PCR test that is not well calibrated. Their arguments seemed logical and the severe flaws of the Drosten paper appeared shocking, even to me

cormandrostenreview.com/retraction-req…
16/

- Extremely high concentrations of primers
- No discrimination between viral fragments and a live virus
- No max Ct value given, but 45 cycles stated
- No unique positive control, nor negative control
- Test is non-specific (where has flu gone?)
- No standardized approach
etc
17

The Eurosurveillance’s response took two months and I can summarize as follows:

-No scientific arguments published
-Peer reviewers were not made public
-Doesn't confirm conflicts of interests (there obviously are)

eurosurveillance.org/content/10.280…
18/

For a test so embedded in society nowadays, wouldn’t you expect more?

Don’t we deserve more?

Anonymous peer reviewer @StephenABustin, noted in a podcast that he was a peer reviewer of the paper.

chironreturn.org/audio/210201-s…
19/

Interestingly, Stephen Bustin testified under oath in 2000 in the Wakefield case. He was paid 225k GBP. 1500 hours(!) for an hourly rate of 150 GBP
The arguments that he used under oath can directly be applied for rejecting Drosten’s paper.

The case:
mega.nz/file/ocZAXBzS#…
20/

Bustin made some shocking revelations in the podcast. For example, he didn’t even test the primers. Check out min 24.

How does the 24h peer review compare to the 1500 hour put into the research for the Wakefield case?

This PCR test imprisoned the Western Population.

21/

Also, Stephen Bustin has conflicts of interests. Looking for funding for an extreme PCR. Does he benefit from more or less PCR tests?

https://twitter.com/StephenABustin/status/1339999348634075141

https://twitter.com/frostreports/status/1309449290843074566

22/

@Kevin_McKernan points out the flipping of Stephen Bustin very well.

https://twitter.com/Kevin_McKernan/status/1357790150378590208

23/

And here with the corresponding audio samples of the podcast and the Wakefield Case.

https://twitter.com/Kevin_McKernan/status/1359345102569811969

24/

@MarionKoopmans from Dutch @RIVM and co-author, states that Retraction Request is settled.

Uh no??

To me this looks like you hired a 'scientist' without a moral compass, who changes his arguments based on the lumpsum of money that he is paid.

https://twitter.com/MarionKoopmans/status/1357378486386782209

25/

Allegedly, the WHO protocol has been updated. But it seems the PCR test is still lacking significantly.
For example, in this paper from @RIVM, the target genes of the used tests are shown.
< 10% uses 3 target genes or more!

rivm.nl/sites/default/…

26/

“Two is the minimum and I would be happy with three”, even Stephen Bustin says in the podcast at min 35-37. Three target genes are preferred for COVID19 specificity. Bustin even says if one is positive and one negative, they decide the test +.

27/

https://twitter.com/Kevin_McKernan/status/1356378161433505793

28/

Remember that Novacyt #NCYT happily announced in September 2020 to launch a two-gene test for countries that require this?

Now what is the real significance of their reported high specificity and sensitivity with only 1 or 2 gene targets?

novacyt.com/wp-content/upl…

29/

So, to repeat, I am not a microbiologist, but here I see two parties. One without vested interests, transparent and with scientific arguments. The other with huge vested interests, non-transparent and without publishing scientific arguments.

30/

Therefore, I definitely was not impressed by the ‘rebuttal’ response of @Eurosurveillanc and all the other red flags that I’ve found. I decided to write the companies that I invested in to gain more knowledge about what was going on.

31/

I got no real answer and was only told to look in the Handbook of the product, which I did.

Here is the handbook of the #NCYT Coronavirus COVID-19 genesig®Real-Time PCR assay:

genesig.com/assets/files/P…
32/

Which, I did, and the results were not reassuring me. The #NCYT Handbook states 45 cycles. Which is far too high. This makes me seriously doubt the ethics of the company.

The high number of cycles is not even mentioned as a risk for false positives.
33/

The PCR companies have a potentially very perverse revenue loop.

More positives -> track and trace -> contacts also need to do a PCR test -> more revenue.

Dangerous cycle with huge effect on whole society if TRUE that PCR test is not as reliable as thought

34/

Critical questions should be asked to management. There should be clarification about specificity, target genes, Cycle Treshold (Ct), positive control and negative control. #NCYT

35/

#ALERS still has not replied to my questions that I send them two weeks ago. Also, my reminder from a week ago must have slipped through.

When I congratulated the management on 2020 results and asked for clarification on margins it took the CFO only 6 hours to elaborate.

36/

@MarionKoopmans from @RIVM admits here that the PCR test only detects viral load instead of a live virus. She admits also that the PCR is less appropriate for deciding whether you are infectious.

37/

Also van Dissel from @RIVM admits here that the PCR test only means that you have genetic material but not that you have a live virus. And therefore not, whether you are sick and infectious.

38/

To conclude, our @MinPres Rutte saying that he has never been tested and that testing doesn’t make any sense when you don’t have complaints.

How about our asymptomatic teachers, nurses, doctors and kids?

"All people are equal, but some people are more equal than others"

39/

Critical questions should be asked to anyone in control right now. Governments, scientists and management of life sciences companies.

PCR has a huge effect on society at the moment. We deserve independent, transparent research of the reliability based on science.

40/

Especially, given the huge scandal in Germany where it was found out that politicians paid scientists in order to calculate towards their desired measures. Also not covered significantly by MSM.

@sterrelindhout @antennedowideit

welt.de/politik/deutsc…
41/

Labs should also publish their Ct values. In Florida it is now mandatory for labs to publish Ct values:

21stcenturywire.com/2020/12/11/flo…

42/

Please. I would be happy if you prove my doubts wrong.

However, do this with transparency, objectively and with scientific arguments.

There has been enough fear indoctrination and character assassination.
43/

I hope to see a world where:
-Ratio instead of fear is leading
-Scientists are truly independent
-Both sides of the story get a platform
-Experts with a contrary opinion can be heard instead of ridiculed
44/

-Judiciary is independent and not threatened
-Politicians rule with our whole wellbeing in mind instead of with tunnel vision on one virus.
45/

Dr. Drosten has to to come up with conclusive evidence in German court to verify that the PCR test is reliable.

Obviously, I will follow this closely.

Let’s see if Mainstream Media will pick this up this time.

wochenblick.at/heidelberg-ums…
46/

I have no interests anymore in any of the mentioned shares.

However, I am heavily invested in my human rights, freedom, freedom of speech, privacy and autonomy.

Views are my own.

47/

@mvanpoll @mkeulemans @c_drosten
@goddeketal @freddiesayers @unherd @BallouxFrancois
@NovacytInsider @TaylorQuant @PrimerdesignLtd @JornLuka

@threadreaderapp
unroll