Author: Nikola Tesla

It seems to be pretty common knowledge lately that the PCR testing (and other similar tests) are fraudulent but the depth of the fraud still needs a bit more articulation.

The basics are clear:

• We don’t need to use an arbitrary genomic signature test on healthy individuals
• The “Cycle Threshold” is considered proprietary and leads to upwards of 99% false positive results.
• The means that a “Positive” result doesn’t mean someone is “infected” or sick or will ever be!

Now let’s get to the gritty details…

There is not an FDA Approved Covid-19 test. Not a single one!

These tests are all used under the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) and this means that the companies selling the tests have no liability for damages that happen from the use of the test. This means that a false positive that leads to an individual getting forced onto a ventilator (which is happening!) gives the manufacturer of the test zero liability!

None of these tests have been through a validation study in order to calculate the sensitivity and specificity. This means the error rates for the tests have never been calibrated so there is no proof that they actually test for what they are supposed to be testing for.

In order to prove the efficacy of the test it would need to be compared to a “Gold Standard” but in this case they don’t even have a gold standard because there is no specificity on the test that correlates to a specific virus.

If the tests aren’t calibrated to a specific virus what are they calibrated to?

It’s a test to detect a nucleic acid. The nucleic acids they are testing for are very common and not even specific to common corona viruses. 

So what is the rate of false positives?

With no validation study and no consistency in cycle threshold that they run the tests there’s no way we can know what percent of false positives will come up. Of course because they are only testing for a nucleic acid sequence it’s not correlated to a disease anyway!

Also with no validation study they know they can’t get a full FDA Approval on these tests because the basic requirement involves a validation study and this is why the CDC has already announced that they are canceling this test at the end of 2021.

Unfortunately they can then just apply for an EUA for another test and play the same game again with a new test that again has no validation study and again will be a total fraud but have a new name.

Here is a recent discussion of these points by two Medical doctors who understand the details of this very well.

[iframe style=”border: none;” src=”https://www.bitchute.com/embed/ZkKqGmzJdcZc/” width=”640″ height=”360″ frameborder=”0″ scrolling=”no” /]

Thank you Dr Andrew Kaufman and Dr Amandha Vollmer and the host for this conversation!

Please share this post directly with your friends to cut through the censorship on social media platforms and share your opinion in the comments below.

Photo By gfinder

Here’s a thorough review of the ingredients in all four of the so called “vaccines” for covid-19 by a doctor who has a 40 year career in nutritional health and a great skeptic of the germ theory. He’s the author of the classic book The pH Miracle and has been an advocate of the alkaline diet for maintaining health.

You’ll see if you take the time to review this that this doctor has a full scale microscopy lab where he analyzed all four of these injections with both TEM (Transmission Electron Microscope) and SEM (Scanning Electron Microscope) in order to get the full scope of the ingredients including the Graphene Oxide, PEG, Aluminum Oxide, Titanium Oxide, Lead and many other ingredients.

The written report of Dr Young’s analysis is rather technical but an important reference:

Figures 17 and 18 [below] show the identification of organic carbon, oxygen and nitrogen particulates with an aggregate of embedded nanoparticles including bismuth, titanium, vanadium, iron, copper, silicon and aluminum which were all found in the so-called Pfizer “vaccine.”

Figure 17 – shows an organic (Carbon-Oxygen-Nitrogen) aggregate with embedded nanoparticles of bismuth, titanium. vanadium. iron, copper, silicon, aluminum embedded in Pfizer “vaccine!”

Dr Robert Young also explains the rouleau effects in the blood of injection recipients as well as other blood clotting outcomes. This is a long video but it’s worth spending the time with this one and go through it.

[iframe width=”640″ height=”360″ scrolling=”no” frameborder=”0″ style=”border: none;” src=”https://www.bitchute.com/embed/Z2sAH0Woz38r/” data-mce-src=”https://www.bitchute.com/embed/Z2sAH0Woz38r/” data-mce-style=”border: none;” /]

Please share this post with your friends who are skeptical about what’s in the shots so they can see the science behind this research. And join in the conversation by sharing your thoughts on this in the comments below.

Dr Robert Young Reference:
https://www.drrobertyoung.com/post/transmission-electron-microscopy-reveals-graphene-oxide-in-cov-19-vaccines
Photo By focalphoto

I appreciate the work of both Dr Andrew Kaufman and Dr Thomas Cowan quite a bit and have posted many interviews and videos of theirs but this one from today is great.

You’ll be hearing all about the flaws in the germ theory and why it never made sense to even consider viruses as causative agents in the first place! 

Thanks Mike Adams for finally having them both on your show.

[iframe src=”https://www.brighteon.com/embed/08e2ac4b-461e-4852-b8cf-2c2bded2a1ea” width=”560″ height=”315″ frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen=”” /]

I’ll keep this one short because it’s Friday evening but please share this post and get this vital information out so it can save lives from the hysteria that has taken over the world.

Photo By EpicTop10.com

Finally here’s a study we’ve all been waiting for which compares those who have had the two shot Pfizer “vaccine” with unvaccinated people that have been sick with what was considered SARS-Cov2 infection (as well as single shot Pfizer recipients who never got the 2nd shot).

Then among these groups they compared the future outcomes of reinfection including what they are calling “breakthrough” infection among those vaccinated. The two shot vaccinated individuals had a 13.06 fold increase of having a “breakthrough” infection. Yes you read that right over 13 time more likely to be sick again!

This is a retrospective study where they reviewed data from healthcare records in Israel where they have some of the highest uptake of vaccination worldwide but there are some issues that I have with the study.

Being highly skeptical of PCR testing data I am concerned that this is one of the pieces of data they used to formulate their conclusion. However they did use other means as well including symptomatic illness which makes this study worth looking at:

COVID-19-related information was captured as well, including dates of the first and second dose of the vaccine and results of any polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests for SARS-CoV-2, given that all such tests are recorded centrally. Records of COVID19-related hospitalizations were retrieved as well, and COVID-19-related mortality was screened for. Additionally, information about COVID-19-related symptoms was extracted from EMRs, where they were recorded by the primary care physician or a certified nurse who conducted in-person or phone visits with each infected individual.

And they did do a decent job of creating the groups of individuals (cohorts) in this study:

The eligible study population was divided into three groups: (1)fully vaccinated and SARS-CoV-2-naïve individuals, namely MHS members who received two doses of the BioNTech/Pfizer mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine by February 28, 2021, did not receive the third dose by the end of the study period and did not have a positive PCR test result by June 1, 2021; (2) unvaccinated previously infected individuals, namely MHS members who had a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test recorded by February 28, 2021 and who had not been vaccinated by the end of the study period; (3) previously infected and vaccinated individuals, including individuals who had a positive SARSCoV-2 PCR test by February 28, 2021 and received one dose of the vaccine by May 25, 2021, at least 7 days before the study period. The fully vaccinated group was the comparison (reference) group in our study. Groups 2 and 3, were matched to the All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415; this version posted August 25, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint comparison group 1 in a 1:1 ratio based on age, sex and residential socioeconomic status.

The results of this study sure seem unequivocal to me. The natural immunity offered magnitudes higher protection against all outcomes including symptomatic illness, hospitalization and death (and even positive PCR tests which to me makes no difference because it’s a proven unreliable evaluation and manipulated by an undisclosed cycle threshold).

They also matched age and sex among the cohorts so no one can say they were comparing the natural immunity of young healthy individuals with older people. They even took into account comorbitities of the individuals because they had access to the medical records of all the people in the study.

This was also not a small study, it included 673,676 two dose vaccinated individuals, 62,883 unvaccinated “previously infected” individuals, and 42,099 single dose “previously infected” individuals.

Frankly the results of this study are even more astonishing than the Abstract reveals:

As for symptomatic SARS-COV-2 infections during the follow-up period, 199 cases
were recorded, 191 of which were in the vaccinated group and 8 in the previously
infected group.

After adjusting for comorbidities, we found a 27.02-fold risk (95% CI, 12.7 to 57.5) for symptomatic breakthrough infection…

Nine cases of COVID-19-related hospitalizations were recorded, 8 of which were in
the vaccinated group and 1 in the previously infected group (Table S1). No COVID19-related deaths were recorded in our cohorts.

Anyway, I’m not going to belabor this post because the data speaks for itself.

Please share this post far and wide with all your friends and family members and join the conversation by sharing your thoughts on this subject in the comments below.

Source:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1.full.pdf

Preprint Abstract:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1

Photo By AJC1