Explain to me why the Bath NHS Trust figures show that the numbers don't add up, please.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
Printable View
Explain to me why the Bath NHS Trust figures show that the numbers don't add up, please.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
I don’t need to express my thoughts about it, I’m just posting a newspaper article. ThanksQuote:
Originally Posted by Tito Fuente
To add to the above: he said the numbers were "faked" - not that they didn't add up.
All a bit useless then. Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by TWGL1
Why don’t you read the lockdown files …..Quote:
Originally Posted by Tito Fuente
The word "faked" can be interpreted in many different ways when it comes to numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tito Fuente
Read them? I subscribed to The Telegraph to ensure I could read every article they post about the lockdown stories.Quote:
Originally Posted by TWGL1
Attachment 5439
:thumbup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tito Fuente
This is my favourite one so far :hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
While we're here though, you were going to explain why the FOI showed that Covid numbers were false and also that the inventor of PCR tests said that they couldn't be used for viruses ("or words to that effect").
Attachment 5440Quote:
Originally Posted by Tito Fuente
You missed this bit:Quote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
While we're here though, you were going to explain why the FOI showed that Covid numbers were false and also that the inventor of PCR tests said that they couldn't be used for viruses ("or words to that effect").
:biggrin:
Here's the inventor of the PCR test saying it's not a virus diagnostic tool.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tito Fuente
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4ljJxk5j2I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wT3IqZjT_9A
He's talking specifically talking about HIV diagnosis in both videos.Quote:
Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.
From it:
- Even if Mullis had voiced a similar statement before his death in 2019, this quote does not mean the PCR test is unable to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 - the virus that causes COVID-19 - rather that it cannot determine whether the individual tested is infectious. -
Note the wording, 'Even if'. It tries to cast doubt on whether Mullis said what he did. No doubt hoping the reader wouldn't bother looking for themselves.
"Even if he had voiced...".Quote:
Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.
Did he say it? Or has it been misattributed to him by people on the internet who have misunderstood the quote about PCR detecting viruses.
It apparently cannot detect whether the person is infectious themselves. I would assume that it's quite a big difference.
I didn't hear anything in the videos you posted about PCRs being unable to detect viruses. You can timestamp it for me though if you like? I might be miles off my game tonight.
He said you can find whatever you want if you run enough cycles. That's why here they ran them at 42 cycles and above for when they wanted to fake higher numbers. 28 cycles is the max.
And anyhow, as I've pointed out enough times at this forum, no-one anywhere worldwide has ever isolated the wholly fake and mythical SARS-CoV-2 virus. That's because it has never existed.
Unbelievable Jeff, I mean Matt..
Attachment 5442
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...cock-whatsapp/Quote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
@ 40 seconds in the shorter second video. He says "amplify", I.e. cycle. He goes on to imply you can find whatever you desire to erroneously by over-cycling his PCR test, which as mentioned happened in Blighty when they ran it at 42 cycles whenever the prevailing narrative required more (fake) cases of Covid-19.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tito Fuente
The Tanzanian president called BS in 2020 after a goat and some fruit tested positive for Covid-19. He was among a handful of leaders from black majority countries who refused to go along with the Covid hoax. He and they wound up brown bread within 18 months. The presidents of Haiti and Burundi were two of the others. The one leader of a white majority country who also said no is still with us although he, the president of Belarus, was almost toppled in a coup for not playing ball.
Ta for that link. It opens with:-Quote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
- Matt Hancock wanted to “deploy” a new Covid variant to “frighten the pants off” the public and ensure they complied with lockdown, leaked messages seen by The Telegraph have revealed.
The Lockdown Files – more than 100,000 WhatsApp messages sent between ministers, officials and others – show how the Government used scare tactics to force compliance and push through lockdowns. -
But we can be sure someone who's unable or unwilling to comprehend simple English (AKA a Teletubby) will come along to insist Covid wasn't a contrived psy-op from the off and that the government and its ministers acted in good faith throughout.
We can be equally confident they were mug enough to volunteer for a Covid needle which was the primary objective of the entire caper that most seemingly still haven't cottoned on to.
I posted two links a few days back that detailed Pfizer's decades long history of lies and deceit. Those who rolled a sleeve up for something made by those charlatans must feel like kicking themselves.
Attachment 5443Quote:
Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.
I think the WHO need to take over when the next pandemic hits.
Orwell's greatest warning from his novel 1984 was the state (government = govern mind) controlling the psychology of the population through fear.
For almost two years it, in alliance with corporate media, induced mass hysteria and psychological conformity.
The Edward Bernays propaganda schtick worked a treat.
"...which as mentioned happened in Blighty when they ran it at 42 cycles whenever the prevailing narrative required more (fake) cases of Covid-19."Quote:
Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.
Can you provide a source for this wild claim?
"The presidents of Haiti and Burundi were two of the others [who ended up "brown bread"]
Yes, I remember this one. You said that the president of Haiti was assassinated so they could install a pro-vaccine shill. The new president wasn't pro-vaccine either though, was he? Like all of your claims, they turn out to be false.
Of course they didn't act in good faith throughout. Anybody with a modicum of sense can recognise that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.
I had the Oxford/Moderna vaccines - how does that fit with your Pfizer/Satanic narrative?
Who?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
You're terrified of everything because you watch endless YouTube videos, for God's sake :hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.
PCR Pandemic: Ramp up PCR 'test' to 40-45 cycle yielding 97% false positives. Apparently Matt Hancock was testing twice a week.��Quote:
Originally Posted by Tito Fuente
That’s was the issue with the PCR test , too many false positives, which became a casedemic
Where's the source for that? I've used that quote: "PCR Pandemic: Ramp up PCR 'test' to 40-45 cycle yielding 97% false positives." to try to find a source for it and I'm not getting any hits.Quote:
Originally Posted by TWGL1
Thanks.
The thing is this is not new information… but I can get a link
https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1411/rr
Hancock now wants immunity on care home deaths
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news...ution-26391476
I don't know whether it's new or old information as I can't find the information anywhere other than what has been presented as fact on here.Quote:
Originally Posted by TWGL1
Even now, the link you have just shared is about lateral flow tests - not PCR tests - which is what you and Organ Morgan have said were flawed.
Do you have any sources to back up the quote "PCR Pandemic: Ramp up PCR 'test' to 40-45 cycle yielding 97% false positives"?
He's an absolute ghoul. I hope he sees the inside of a cell in the near future.Quote:
Originally Posted by TWGL1
Apologies, the article does go into PCRs as well as LFTs.Quote:
Originally Posted by TWGL1
"Not as accurate as previously thought" is the determination from the person who submitted that article to BMJ.
Nothing in there about "40-45 cycling" and 97% false positives though, as far as I can see.
https://rumble.com/vd70ip-world-heal...ielded-to.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by Tito Fuente
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...453-7/fulltextQuote:
Originally Posted by Tito Fuente
Lancet study
0.8 % - 4%
That could be a large number when testing 300k per day
An interesting read about numerous issues that PCR testing could face but, nonetheless, there's absolutely nothing (again) relating to "PCR Pandemic: Ramp up PCR 'test' to 40-45 cycle yielding 97% false positives".Quote:
Originally Posted by TWGL1
You couldn't have just plucked those figures from thin air so if you can remember where you got them from, I'd love to be educated on it.
This article explains it a bit betterQuote:
Originally Posted by Tito Fuente
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-b550133.html