RT - PCR Tests

finger-pointing-left16.gif

RT - PCR Tests :

It seems to me that there are so many points at which a RT-PCR Test can become polluted, or fail, this is the biggest reason the "Manufactured Pandemic article may have stated quote

My studies of this subject up to now are leading me to believe that when people like Kim Woo-joo say things like "the test is very accurate" what they really mean is "When the sample is taken, sealed, transported, and stored properly, and then the transfer of the specimen goes well, and then all the complex phases of the test are performed flawlessly (though there are very many possible errors) and then the sample is measured accurately for fluorescence is correctly computed, and then the data is properly analysed  the test is very accurate" and even then I do not believe it is accurate at all. If that is what they "mean" it is a lie. Right?

 

It is like when a vaccine was tested for mercury and the test proved positive when the authorities said it was not in the vaccine. When pressed they said that if the mercury was added after preparation was in bottling, they would have to record it was in there, but as it was in the vaccine in creating it before bottling they never had to write it down. It is just pure sinister deception. This happens in the food industry too, I seem to recall reading Marmite contains Monosodium Glutamate (MSG), but it occurs naturally so they don't have to put it as a content on the label. 

 

"The problem is the test is known not to work.

It uses ‘amplification’ which means taking a very very tiny amount of DNA and growing it exponentially until it can be analyzed. Obviously any minute contaminations in the sample will also be amplified leading to potentially gross errors of discovery.

Additionally, it’s only looking for partial viral sequences, not whole genomes, so identifying a single pathogen is next to impossible even if you ignore the other issues. "

unquote :

They are also very expensive, and thus the many points of possible failure have a huge incentive for drug companies and others involved to cover these things up.

research "Steiner's Virological Model" about Spanish flu

versus

The Current Virological Model

HOW THEY MIGHT MASS MURDER PEOPLE:

1) The "Power of Nightmares" scenario includes political power from the politicians alone being able to understand "The Enemy" here Covid-19 and other viruses. Thus they do not want to follow a plain logical progressive plan to empower the public with knowledge. They want confusion on everything.

In my opinion David Icke has fallen for this strategy by making the statement that Covid-19 is totally false, it does not exist. That remained a possibility the authorities hid the facts so much about the illness and the pathogen. He now leaves himself open to being totally debunked, and by following his lead Infowars might get closed down for dumb misinformation. They need to be careful. 

1) Rivers Postulates only in China

2) Add bogus primers to all the PCR Tests allowing you to get as many positive or negative tests as you desire

X) A main criticism of the PCR Test is pollution, as the sample multiplies because of the smallest pollution exponential growth leads to false results so how can they know if that happened or not?

X) Did the Primers work properly on the first 1-3 million tests?

X) If so.... why are they frantically looking for other ones? If they work so perfectly already? (they are now saying there are 3 types of Covid-19)

X) How much does each PCR test kit cost?

X) Who makes the money off the PCR Test Kits

X) How many brands of the same PCR Test kits are there (100?)

PCR TEST :

Each test in each country is different, using a different snippet of RNA, and making it into DNA. Probably so each country gets its own slice of the cake selling the very expensive R-T PCR Tests. Do different fluorescent dyes need to be manufactured for each genome snippet od is it the same? Billions are being made. The public never seem to be told the entire cost of one "tested positive statistic" when all the various stages have been gone through.

Quote "FDA has approved a few rapid tests that give results in less than an hour" so what this means is dozens of countries created a PCR Test, hoping they would "hit the jackpot" financially and get approval, showing a corrupt underpinning financial structure? And this is why Korea want to try to "show themselves" expert at containing the virus and publish low virus stats, to get their PCR Test to get FTA Approval and win massive cash benefits??

As a virus can remain in low viral load in your body, and the PCR test supposedly can find "a needle in a haystack" why can this test not detect you had it in the past, recovered, and now have it in low viral load?

Of the first 3 million tests how many were Rapid PCR? How can the stats be uniform without that info? How much do the two separate tests cost, each one? So the PCR Test itself does not test for viral load? You go away and do a test on the 45 cycle sample? Why is the viral load info nowhere in the online stats fr the first 1-3 million? Show us the viral load info on the computer. Stop treating us like children. the public are intelligent.

note - blood versus swab tests .

DNA - A / C / G / T

RNA - A / U / G / C

All the R-T PCR Test kits will not replicate RNA unless it is first converted into DNA (this is the first opportunity for the test to go wrong) . Usually RNA is prepared from DNA (called Transcription), this is why the process of converting RNA to DNA is called Reverse-Transcription. This change is brought about by an (one of several?) enzyme called "a reverse transcriptase".

 

 

1) This makes cDNA (complementary DNA) a chosen snippet of RNA to make into cDNA (not the entire RNA genome)

2) Primer (a short single-stranded nucleic acid) is then used to replicate the cDNA into many copies called ds cDNA ,

3) To see what is replicated in real time (RT) the ds cDNA has fluorescent green tags (SYBR Green?) attached to it.

4) Oh my goodness! They then do not count the ds cDNA snippets, they measure fluorescence 

5) SYBR Green is expensive 

6) So..... if the person taking the sample from the nose gets Covid-19 on the swab from his clothes, or breath etc, the whole RNA strand goes into the sample. Would the test detect that segment of the RNA ???

In each country the R-T PCR Test kit is targeting a different snippet of the mapped RNA of C-19, Germany target a different part of the Covid19 RNA than Japan etc.

1) Rapid Diagnostic Tests - Antigen Detecting  (low sensitivity) is it this that detects the common cold? Did "Manufactured Pandemic" have this partly in mind?

How many of these tests were part of the first 1-3 million stats

Triage tests? (ridiculous)

 

2) Rapid Diagnostic Tests - Host Antibody Detection 

only able to be used in recovery phase ? as based on antibody response. 2nd week after onset of symptoms.

Blood Tests take 10-15 minutes, prick the skin to produce a drop of blood, and can be performed at home.

3) R-T PCR Test -

claim = more than 90% accurate

time 6-8 hours

very expensive 

This was called a "gold standard" as it is better than the other two rapid diagnostic tests, to hide the fact there is no  "gold standard" to which the R=T PCR Test can itse;lf be compared. Who agrees?

"the severity of infection" is. I take it you mean "viral load". I heard they push it to 45 Cycles. You say in essence "the severity of infection, or viral load, is ascertained by how many cycles it takes to reach 35 billion copies". Rght? so..... that is measured in a lab? You say only 35 Cycles are used. How do you know at the time, before you go the lab, how many billion copies there are? I expect the answer - we don't. Ok so this test gives 35 results and a computer measures them all? On one result after 35 Cycles that they measure and calculate backwards its viral load? The lower the cycles the lower the viral load. Is this right?

I find it illogical that they say "The R-T PCR Test cannot test for past infections, as the virus is there for only a specific window of time. They are saying this falsity to hide the inaccuracy of the test. If it really can "Find a needle in a haystack" it will find some past infection viruses never destroyed by the immune system,

notes:

A reverse transcriptase (RT) is an enzyme used to generate complementary DNA (cDNA) from an RNA template, a process termed reverse transcription. Reverse transcriptases are used by retroviruses to replicate their genomes, by retrotransposon mobile genetic elements to proliferate within the host genome, by eukaryotic cells to extend the telomeres at the ends of their linear chromosomes, and by some non-retroviruses such as the hepatitis B virus, a member of the Hepadnaviridae, which are dsDNA-RT viruses.

notes

A primer is a short single-stranded nucleic acid utilized by all living organisms in the initiation of DNA synthesis. The enzymes responsible for DNA replication, DNA polymerases , are only capable of adding nucleotides to the 3’-end of an existing nucleic acid, requiring a primer be bound to the template before DNA polymerase can begin a complementary strand. [1]

notes

https://www.researchgate.net/post/ds_cDNA_synthesis_for_RNAseq2

Since the kits for ds cDNA synthesis are crazily expensive, I am planning to use a Tetro cDNA synthesis kit for first strand synthesis with random examples and then use a second strand buffer ...

notes

kits for ds cDNA synthesis are described as "crazily expensive". can you tell us say in your country, how much one test will cost after all the phases are go through, and list for us each phase with the cost, then add them all up?

notes

SYBR Green I (SG) is an asymmetrical cyanine dye used as a nucleic acid stain in molecular biology. The SYBR family of dyes is produced by Molecular Probes Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Life Technologies Corporation. SYBR Green I binds to DNA. The resulting DNA-dye-complex absorbs best 497 nanometer blue light (λmax = 497 nm) and emits green light (λmax = 520 nm). The stain preferentially binds to double-stranded DNA, but will stain single-stranded (ss) DNA with lower performance. 

notes

but how a bit of RNA from the sample that became DNA is then dyed could be clearer. You mean the dye somehow can only ever glue itself to that tiny bit of RNA that became DNA? What is a bit of Covid-19 went in the sample if the technician coughed? Would the green dye attach to the who RNA strand? Or would the test give a false positive simply as it is there?

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Limitations.

One major limitation of PCR is that prior information about the target sequence is necessary in order to generate the primers that will allow its selective amplification.[36] This means that, typically, PCR users must know the precise sequence(s) upstream of the target region on each of the two single-stranded templates in order to ensure that the DNA polymerase properly binds to the primer-template hybrids and subsequently generates the entire target region during DNA synthesis.

Like all enzymes, DNA polymerases are also prone to error, which in turn causes mutations in the PCR fragments that are generated.[37]

Another limitation of PCR is that even the smallest amount of contaminating DNA can be amplified, resulting in misleading or ambiguous results. To minimize the chance of contamination, investigators should reserve separate rooms for reagent preparation, the PCR, and analysis of product. Reagents should be dispensed into single-use aliquots. Pipettes with disposable plungers and extra-long pipette tips should be routinely used.

link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymerase_chain_reaction

___________________________________________________________

The chess board doubling problem.

I read it is 45 Cycles not 35. Indeed Dr Andrew Kaufman said so. Surely YOU are wrong and it is 45 - as in the "Chess Board Doubling Problem" 35 Trillion is only reached on square 46.

That is unscientific. It is "pot luck" as to how livid with the virus a swab is.

This test is based on a "primer" chemical working well. If the primers are so good why are they frantically searching for new ones?

New Tests? Simply based on sputum proving a more likely positive than throat swabs

LabCorp Test and Quest Test. This is all because of a lack of swabs, using sputum. Very strange

see Rick Martin, CEO of Microgen Diagnostics,

.Note: Dr. Biswaroop Roy he is trying to explain this for years , how rt pcr test has 1-80% false rate