Here you go....
The PCR argument is Facebook garbage. An out of context quote from 1996, where the inventor clarified that it detects quantitatively how much of a viral (HIV in this case) gene is present, not a qualitative "yes" or "no." It's easy to make validated protocols to use it effectively for diagnosis.
STOP DOING YOUR "RESEARCH" ON FACEBOOK
HERE1 – Reuters is a commie owned run news, so we all know commie news spins their articles towards the angle they want sheep like you to believe.
2 – The article points out the statement referenced was from a FB posting, which you then attempt to gaslight me again, like all commies do, and lie that I obtain my research from FB, which again, makes you lose the debate for using gaslighting. It is more than obvious I post solid scientific evidence, being nobody can successfully refute it, except for clowns like you attempting to succeed with your lying and gaslighting.
3 – The reuters author is interpreting another authors writing, which was itself a third person accounting, which makes the reuters author a fourth person accounting.
So, we’re supposed to believe a fourth person accounting from a commie run news organization attempting a fact check. Is this where I get to start laughing? And yet you want your postings here to be considered credentialed based on that? You are not just a clown, you are a complete idiot.
4 – The written article itself proves the tests are not valid with the below comment:
EXHIBIT: A -
A spokesperson for Public Health England told Reuters why PCR tests are being used widely in England: “Molecular diagnostic tests, such as real-time PCR, are the gold standard methods for identifying individuals with an active viral infection, such as SARS-CoV-2 (the cause of COVID-19 disease), in their respiratory tract. These tests are rapid and produce results in real-time.
Why is the above quote invalid, thereby proving PCR a non-reliable test? It is the fact Elon Musk had 4 tests performed last year, back-to-back and spaced evenly apart time-wise, and resulted in 2 positive tests and 2 negative tests, which proved they are a joke, just as you are a joke.
Further evidence to prove you are a clown, coming from your linked commie reuters article, I give you:
EXHIBIT: B -
“It is important to note that detecting viral material by PCR does not indicate that the virus is fully intact and infectious, i.e. able to cause infection in other people. The isolation of infectious virus from positive individuals requires virus culture methods. These methods can only be conducted in laboratories with specialist containment facilities and are time consuming and complex.”
The above clearly identifies the test is unreliable based on the fact they admit a culture is needed to determine a correct result.
Now, it is not too often amateurs, such as yourself, serve up a home run pitch, but I want to thank you for providing that waist-high inside fast ball I just sent over the left field fence.
Court is adjourned.
