What if people with just the common cold and Influenza are testing positive for Covid?

originally posted by: nonspecific
Oh I don't mind in the slightest it's just disappointing more than anything.

As long as you are going for me personally it's a reminder that you have to go for me because you've got nothing to counter my opinion that's backed up by evidence.

I'd prefer it if you could give me a real challenge but as you can't then stick stick to calling me a troll or a shill or implying that my opinion is void because you think I have a financial interest in people getting tested for covid.



a reply to: IAMTAT

We've been over this before, NS.

You've admitted you troll on ATS.
You've also admitted you receive payment for pushing China Virus tests.

That's old news...Just let it go.
I have.

I honestly have nothing against you...and I really have no interest in personally attacking you.

originally posted by: nonspecific
I'm no virologist and I'm not qualified in anything relavant but I don't need to be to do my job well.

I don't need qualifications or to understand everything to comment here either.

I just need to know enough to be confident I'm correct

a reply to: vonclod

Agree, I just think it's funny, a gynaecologist, or obstetrician, voodoo witch doctor, geo technical engineer..or anyone with a doctorate..in anything, are to be believed, in their virology advice/statements/conspiracies

Oh dear.

I have at no point admitted I receive payment for pushing China virus tests they are your words not mine.

For a start I would never use the term China virus, that's something you do to politicise the pandemic and it makes you look rather silly in my opinion.

I don't push tests either, there's no way I could do that even if o wanted to, I have no ability to coerce or even book a test for anyone it has to be done by the person wanting the test or on their behalf by a family member or friend.

I did not admit to trolling on ATS I grew impatient with your absurd ramblings and reacted badly and then apologised saying my actions were wrong and a bit trollish in that one instance. Please stop claiming I am doing things that I am not and please stop attacking me personally because I will not agree with you on certain subjects.

As you claim you have no interest in doing so can we both agree now that any further mention of this on your part is uncalled for and that no more claims of me being a paid shill, intentional troll or being paid to promote PCR testing will occur.



a reply to: IAMTAT

a reply to: Serdgiam

First, there is technically no test for "covid." It is diagnosed symptomatically, accompanied by a positive result from a PCR test that, ideally, identifies the presence of SARS-CoV-2.

This is just untrue there are 2 methods to test for covid. Antigen test. This COVID-19 test detects certain proteins in the virus. Using a long nasal swab to get a fluid sample, some antigen tests can produce results in minutes. Others may be sent to a lab for analysis.

A positive antigen test result is considered accurate when instructions are carefully followed, but there's an increased chance of false-negative results — meaning it's possible to be infected with the virus but have a negative result.

PCR test. Also called a molecular test, this COVID-19 test detects genetic material of the virus using a lab technique called polymerase chain reaction (PCR). A fluid sample is collected by inserting a long nasal swab (nasopharyngeal swab) into your nostril and taking fluid from the back of your nose or by using a shorter nasal swab (mid-turbinate swab) to get a sample.if sent to an outside lab. PCR tests are very accurate when properly performed by a health care professional, but the rapid test can miss some cases.

The full genomic model of SARS-CoV-2 is a roughly 30k base sequence, and unless something has changed, the test identifies roughly 1% of the full sequence at ~300. This smaller segment could, theoretically, be present outside of viral genomes altogether (including in other viruses). This is then transcribed into DNA sequences and put through amplification cycles to render it observable.

Your correct it does look for 1 percent it looks for the spike protein. Its this protein that gave corona its name and is specific to the corona family. Meaning no way it could detect the flu!

Historically, PCR tests have been at the foundation of false epidemics and quite a bit of controversy. AFAIK, there are still different CT (amplification cycle) standards across the board, possibly including different thresholds for vaccinated vs unvaccinated.

This is just untrue and made up the only problem the test can have is not doing enough cycles to detect the virus,

This also means that testing for, say, antibodies may indicate a previous exposure to a virus but may not have particular relevance to "covid susceptibility" specifically. To identify this, we would need to introduce a much broader spectrum of data that essentially pulls back from CCT (Critical Covid/Corona Theory) and explores the presence of auto-immune diseases in the population in general.

Theres more, but.. meh.

This makes no sense are you trying to claim that antigens dont kill a virus? You make no sense

When it comes down to it, imo, there is the possibility that the small segment involved in RT-PCR testing is also present in some influenza viruses.. Or even in completely different genetic structures altogether (like a fruit). This may be the case both for the initial segment as well as the amplified complementary DNA. Whether or not this is actually the case would require actual scientific exploration and testing. Which is dead

Well your opinion is wrong influenza does not contain the spike protein if it did it would be a coronavirus.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

You have speculated without proof or links to proof. This is merely a philosophical exercise imagining a "what-if" possibility.

originally posted by: KansasGirl
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

There’s also the pesky fact that covid-19 hasn’t been isolated by anyone anywhere, and the reference sample that is sent out when requested, is a computer-generated “sample.”

Every vaccine manufacturer seems to have made their vaccine based on the genetic sequence supplied by China in January and all based on the spike protein. I find that odd

a reply to: darkbake

There has been many threads on here that hospitals were claiming extra covid cases for money, and that isn't speculation, throw in tests that give false positives some of the time, and you have more than the traditional "what if" fantasy set up scenario.

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
The common cold statistically is a pandemic.

In the course of a year, people in the U.S. suffer 1 billion colds, according to some estimates.

Every year, worldwide seasonal influenza causes an estimated 1 billion infections

Let's think about this, we know the testing was coming up with many false positives on those that were sick but what were they really sick from ?

Influenza A ?
Influenza B ?
Or one of of the 200 different varieties of the common cold ?

Since almost 1 billion annual infections of influenzas were totally wiped out, where did they all go ?

Would it not be possible to stage a pandemic on those three very popular sicknesses ?

This after a real disease escaped but was largely contained within China.
I am not saying covid19 doesn't exist but rather it was exploited way beyond it's real impact on the world through false positives and propaganda.
That is was no more than a yearly strain that goes around and kills people, like other years in the past.
The way co-morbidities are allowed to be reported from deaths in people also play a factor in pumping up the total numbers.
The example of a person 3 years into stage 4 pancreatic cancer that dies and also tested positive for covid 2 days before their death is a way to crank up the numbers but is super deceptive to people. About 10 million people die from cancer every year around the world just imagine if even 15% tested positive for covid when they died, 1.5 million people, see how easy it is to manipulate the numbers for those who get sick and/or die.

This is what I said from the beginning. COVID was stuck out being synonymous with 'coronavirus'. Coronavirus = COVID. All the test were for 'coronavirus', didn't matter which one, SHAZAM!! They all equaled the 84. = positive 'cases'. Oh fear! My math is extinct, I wonder if anyone ever bothered to add up reported "cases" to actual number of people living in whatever area or whatnot.

originally posted by: nonspecific
A PCR test amplifies a fragment of virus DNA. It can't amplify the common cold virus and then detect it of it's not geared up to detect the common cold.

It's possible that people have influenza and covid but it still won't detect influenza and show it as covid 19.

The new tests are now designed to test for covid and/or influenza in order to be able to establish which if any of the viruses are present in the sample.

Am just an old fool.
Don't know nothin.

Thought Coronaviruses™ didn't contain any DNA™.
Thought that the PCR™ test was looking for Coronavirus™ particles, but apparently : now it can do what only a Doctor™ used to do previously : and that is diagnose a Covid-19 case.

You see : a ' Case™ ' now : has become a positive Sars-Cov-2™ test. Sickness or not.
Because Covid-19™ is an illness, and not a virus : only folks who were actually, physically sick, were called Covid-19 cases.

But don't ask me.
Having a hard time just keeping-up with the redefinitions and such.

originally posted by: Mandroid7
There isn't a post you have made that's made me think.

I am convinced that there is not a whole lot that can make you do so. All you have to do is look up how PCR tests work to realize OP's "what if?" is impossible.

Isnt it understood that they are?

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

There are a lot of problems with the tests.

It's all documented by the FDA.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

The tests can't actually tell you what you have, so a positive test is meaningless. You can go by symptoms, but a ton of things can cause the same symptoms. In the test package insert, for every test, it states that the test cannot distinguish between bacteria and viruses. This means that it does not know what you have , and therefore cannot tell you that you have covid. Here's where to find the documentation for an Abbott assay (the statement is in the first couple pages):
www.molecular.abbott...
I would also suggest reading the Factsheet for Healthcare Providers risks to the patient. This document tells us that taking the test subjects us, and basically everyone we know, to isolation and monitoring. The healthcare providers aren't telling patients though. Its why they will allow weekly testing in lieu of getting jabbed.

One, major, problem with the PCR use that isn't getting talked about is Sanger Sequencing. This is where they use a handful of genes to "verify" an entire organism. Its legitimate, when its used on a known an proven genome. However, when they use it to match a genome that is 99% created by a computer (covid), its an abomination of science. Using a handful of common genetic markers to identify a fictitious genome is a joke.

For me, it doesn't matter what tests positive. Knowing what the Factsheet says, I refuse to take a test and subject family, friends, and myself to isolation and monitoring (camps?). If they want you to take a test, ask what the "risks to the patient" are, and for the package insert. Keep in mind there is a Factsheet for patients, and one for providers (the important one).

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: Blue_Jay33
A PCR test amplifies a fragment of virus DNA. It can't amplify the common cold virus and then detect it of it's not geared up to detect the common cold.

Maybe... but for me to believe this is true requires that I trust those who design the tests.

Hint: I don't, because they are pathological liars, and always have been. I will never believe a single solitray GD thing out of their mouths (or pens). EVER.

It's possible that people have influenza and covid but it still won't detect influenza and show it as covid 19.

No one ever said that it would. What I have said was that they could be symptomatic, and test positive, with the positive being a FALSE positive because they didn't have COVD, they had the flu (or whatever).

The new tests are now designed to test for covid and/or influenza in order to be able to establish which if any of the viruses are present in the sample.

Oh, goody, two-in-one tests that I can have absolutely zero faith in. Yum.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: nonspecific

Thanks, so even though some forms of the cold virus are corona viruses, there is no chance they could be shown as a positive on the current testing for Covid 19?

Of course not! These tests are purrfect! Everyone knows that!

originally posted by: network dude
and so folks here understand, nonspecific works with covid tests as a daily job. Where I'd be careful of taking brain surgery advice from a proctologist, getting testing info from a guy who uses the tests in his daily job likely has some decent info. Plus he hasn't been known to peddle the bad kind of BS. In this conversation, he has clout. IMHO

Using them, regardless how much, has no bearing on knowledge of their manufacturing process(es), etc...

originally posted by: smh4wg
a reply to: angryscotslad

It's specific for whatever digital crap the nih sent the testing centers. Who knows what that is?

They don't have an isolated sample. It's just an algorithm? In any case, it's made up horse hockey.

Thank you. Trust must be earned. Everyone with the CDC, the NIH, the WHO and all other government health 'officials' have accomplished the exact opposite for anyone capable of rational thought - they have obliterated any credibility they may have had going into this thing with their non-stop nonsensical constantly flip-flopping narrative full of gobbledhyspeak.

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: Blue_Jay33
As is said multiple times in that thread the covid 19 PCR tests is)has been superseded by a PCR test that is able to test for more than one virus on the same swab sample.

New test not due until the end of the year, so, no, not yet at least.

Still won't trust it for anything other than an indicator of what narrative they want to spew.

You so realise that what you think has no bearing on the rest of the world whatsoever right?

You understand that thoughts are just in your head and cannot affect the reliability or usefulness of something?

They are just thoughts.



a reply to: tanstaafl