{"id":40195,"date":"2020-12-06T17:03:01","date_gmt":"2020-12-06T21:03:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/?p=40195"},"modified":"2020-12-06T17:04:14","modified_gmt":"2020-12-06T21:04:14","slug":"florida-governor-ron-desantis-bravely-blows-up-the-pcr-test-data","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/?p=40195","title":{"rendered":"Florida Governor Ron DeSantis Bravely Blows Up the PCR Test Data"},"content":{"rendered":"

For The First Time, A US State Will Require Disclosure Of PCR ‘Cycle Threshold’ Data In COVID Tests<\/h1>\n

ZeroHedge.com<\/p>\n

We have detailed the\u00a0controversy surrounding America’s COVID “casedemic” and the misleading results of the PCR test and its amplification procedure<\/strong>\u00a0in great detail over the past few months.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/picture><\/a><\/p>\n

As a reminder, “cycle thresholds” (Ct) are the level at which widely used polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test can detect a sample of the COVID-19 virus. The higher the number of cycles, the lower the amount of viral load in the sample; the lower the cycles, the more prevalent the virus was in the original sample.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/picture><\/a><\/p>\n

Numerous epidemiological experts have argued that\u00a0cycle thresholds are an\u00a0important metric by which patients, the public, and policymakers can make more informed decisions<\/strong>\u00a0about how infectious and\/or sick an individual with a positive COVID-19 test\u00a0might be. However,\u00a0as JustTheNews reports,<\/a>\u00a0health departments across the country are\u00a0failing to collect that data<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Here are a few headlines from those experts and scientific studies:<\/p>\n

1. Experts compiled three datasets with officials from the states of Massachusetts, New York and Nevada that conclude:\u201cUp to 90% of the people who tested positive did not carry a virus.”<\/em><\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

2. The Wadworth Center, a New York State laboratory, analyzed the results of its July tests at the request of the NYT: 794 positive tests with a Ct of 40: \u201cWith a\u00a0Ct threshold of 35<\/strong>, approximately\u00a0half<\/strong>\u00a0of these PCR tests would no longer be considered positive<\/em>,\u201d said the NYT.\u00a0\u201cAnd about\u00a070%\u00a0would no longer be considered positive with a\u00a0Ct of 30! \u201c<\/strong><\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

3. An appeals court in Portugal has\u00a0ruled that the PCR process is not a reliable test for Sars-Cov-2<\/strong><\/a>, and therefore any\u00a0enforced quarantine based on those test results is unlawful.<\/em><\/p>\n

4. A new study from\u00a0the Infectious Diseases Society of America<\/a>, found that\u00a0at 25 cycles of amplification, 70% of PCR test “positives” are not “cases” since the virus cannot be cultured, it’s dead.<\/strong>\u00a0And by 35: 97% of the positives are non-clinical.<\/p>\n

5.\u00a0PCR is not testing for disease, it’s testing for a specific RNA pattern\u00a0<\/strong>and this is the key pivot. When you crank it up to 25, 70% of the positive results are not really “positives” in any clinical sense, since\u00a0<\/u><\/strong>it cannot make you or anyone else sick<\/strong><\/u><\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

So, in summary,\u00a0with regard to\u00a0our current “casedemic”,<\/a>\u00a0positive tests as they are counted today do not indicate a \u201ccase\u201d of anything.<\/strong>\u00a0They indicate that viral RNA was found in a nasal swab. It may be enough to make you sick, but according to the\u00a0New York Times\u00a0and their experts, probably won\u2019t. And certainly not sufficient replication of the virus to make anyone else sick. But you will be sent home for ten days anyway, even if you never have a sniffle.\u00a0And this is the number the media breathlessly reports… and is used to fearmonger mask mandates and lockdowns nationwide…<\/strong><\/p>\n