(How many were false positives we'll probably never know)
I think there is more to that statement than meets the eye.
Up to 90% of PCR Tests for COVID-19 May Be False Positives
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) just updated its data on the number of deaths involving COVID-19, pneumonia, and influenza. This information can be found on the CDC’s website under “Weekly Updates by Select Demographic and Geographic Characteristics.”
This data was always frustrating to me because COVID-19 deaths were always lumped in with other comorbidities. There was no way to strip out the number of actual COVID-19 deaths that had no other listed causes of death… until now:
Above, we can see a screenshot taken directly from the CDC’s website (the highlighting is mine).
The CDC is now breaking out the numbers. Only 6% of the COVID-19 deaths died exclusively from COVID-19. Just 6%! On average, the rest of the COVID-19 “deaths” had two or three other underlying causes of death (the average was 2.6).
COVID-19 total “deaths” in the U.S. are at 168,864.
So 6% is only 10,131 deaths from COVID-19 with no other underlying causes.
But it gets so much better… It really was an exciting weekend.
The New York Times put out an extensive article on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests and how they determine who has COVID-19 or not. The PCR tests are widely used to search for small segments of genetic material that look like COVID-19. If it finds it, the test is positive.
But there is a major problem…
The sensitivity levels of the PCR tests have been set too high.
The New York Times reports that up to 90% of people testing “positive” carried barely any virus.
In other words, people may have had COVID-19 a while ago but certainly didn’t have it now. Or the test may have detected some naturally occurring genetic segments that looked like COVID-19 but weren’t.
To put things in context, if the medical community set appropriate sensitivity levels resulting in “real” positives for COVID-19, the COVID-19-related genetic material in a patient’s sample would have to be anywhere between 100-fold to 1,000-fold the levels that are being used today.
Nuts… that’s how far off the settings are.
The New York Times reports that up to 90% of people testing “positive” carried barely any virus.
www.brownstoneresearch.com
IF that is the case then...someone ought to be considered well hung for being a dick.