{"id":2166,"date":"2020-10-26T16:15:35","date_gmt":"2020-10-26T15:15:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/docs4opendebate.be\/second-wave\/"},"modified":"2020-11-04T14:29:23","modified_gmt":"2020-11-04T13:29:23","slug":"second-wave","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/docs4opendebate.be\/pt-pt\/second-wave\/","title":{"rendered":"Second wave"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Our country is being held hostage by the PCR test<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Update November 3 see below<\/p>\n

October 26th<\/sup> 2020<\/p>\n

The entire Corona debate stands or falls with the use of the PCR test<\/strong><\/p>\n

All the alarming numbers we hear every day are based on this test.
All measures currently being issued are based on results and interpretations of this test, which is used as the main parameter to monitor the corona crisis. The isolation measures\/ work ban, the contact tracing for healthy people, the mask obligation for healthy people, the mandatory test after returning from a \u201cred zone\u201d, closing the catering industry …<\/span><\/p>\n

We have serious doubts about this.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. This test was rushed through with an urgent procedure and was never seriously self-tested for its ability to measure what it should measure. There is no gold standard to compare test results with. 1<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n
  2. The creator Kary Mullis explicitly warned that the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test was for research and not diagnostics. 1<\/sup><\/a> 2<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n
  3. The PCR test is an extremely non-specific test that can yield a lot of false positives (up to 90%). 3<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n
  4. The PCR test works with cycles of amplification of genetic material – a piece of virus genome is enlarged each time. Any contamination (e.g. other viruses, debris of old virus genome) can possibly test a false positive. 2<\/sup><\/a> Remaining virus fragments after an infection have been found to be detectable in the body for weeks. 2<\/sup><\/a> 3<\/sup><\/a> In a healthy person who tests positive, these old virus fragments from a previous infection may be measured. 4<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n
  5. The number of amplification cycles is called the CT (cycle threshold) value. In principle, it is recommended to keep it below 24. 11<\/sup><\/a> Values between 24 – 35 are seen as a gray area. Above, the chance of false positives increases sharply. In many labs, however, the genetic material is amplified up to 37 to 40 (or more) times. 6<\/sup><\/a> 7<\/sup><\/a> Of 11 Belgian labs, we do not even know which CT values are used. 5<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n
  6. If the test is positive in someone, it does not mean that person is actually clinically infected, is ill or will become ill.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    We cannot therefore equate positive tests in healthy people<\/u> with infections. <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Yet we hear this equation in the media all the time. Never before has an epidemic been evaluated on the testing of healthy individuals. Testing healthy people is unscientific and an immense waste of money<\/u>. It doesn’t teach us anything.<\/p>\n

    We cannot automatically equate positive tests with infection with the corona virus in the case of sick people<\/u>.<\/strong><\/p>\n