COVID-19
The Dystopian Future of Canada Part III: PCR and False Positives
Canada, like the whole world, has seemingly descended into chaos.
At the core of lockdowns across most our country and measures ranging from military implementation to Alberta’s light touch with growing positive test numbers (identified as cases) seemingly out of control is a potentially faulty test methodology.
Recently, a family member tested positive for Covid 19 and as a result, we had the opportunity to examine the test result from the Calgary lab. However, it was not until we read past the test result that questions started to surface.
As you can see, the specimen type is identified, nasal swab.
The method of testing is identified as NAT or PCR and ‘was performed using primers and probes targeting the E (envelope protein) gene of the SARS-CoV-2 virus DEVELOPED AT ProvLab.’ ProvLab is the Alberta Government testing lab with multiple sites for sample testing.
I was aware that the blue non-surgical masks people use across the world note on the box that they do not stop viruses or virus based infections, a fact which renders them largely useless for Covid prevention but I was not prepared for the disclaimer printed on the bottom of the test which reads:
“This method was validated at ProvLab. IT HAS NOT BEEN CLEARED OR APPROVED BY THE US FDA OR HEALTH CANADA AND RESULTS SHOULD BE INTERPRETED IN A CLINICAL CONTEXT.”
If this NAT/PCR test has NOT been approved by Health Canada OR the US FDA, then why is Alberta using it and how can we trust the results? According to the Health Canada website, “unauthorized tests may not produce accurate results, leading to potential misdiagnosis,” which could have dire consequences.
Checking into Health Canada, two facts can easily be found. Firstly, there are 102 Covid tests ‘under review’ at present, one of which may be this test executed by ProvLab of Calgary. The tests fall under three broad categories, Antigen, PCR and Serology with rapid and regular kits available to test for Covid 19, SARS and Influenza.
List of testing devices for COVID-19: applications under evaluation – Canada.ca
Two links below notate testing ‘progress’ in Canada:
Health Canada approves first Canadian-made rapid COVID-19 test | Globalnews.ca
Potential patients who test positive may not be testing FOR Covid, but rather one of the family of Corona Viruses. Your mother, father, brother, sister or child could have a regular cold and have the luxury of 2 weeks in lockdown. There have been circumstances of individuals receiving the influenza vaccine testing positive FOR covid shortly thereafter.
And, a second and third verification from British Columbia and the FDA is below:
With a little research by a government friend, I was able to find the following out about the test and results directly from the Health Ministers Office.
“Alberta does not use a commercial test kit for the lab-based reverse transcriptase (RT) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay used for diagnostic testing for the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Alberta’s COVID-19 test was developed and validated at Alberta Precision Laboratories (APL) and the test was further validated by the National Microbiology Lab.
All PCR testing involves amplification cycles. The PCR test used in Alberta has been confirmed to be highly specific for SARS-CoV-2. It does not react to other viruses and it cannot amplify a negative sample into a positive.
Alberta is currently evaluation a rapid antigen test, the Abbott PanBio test, for use in Alberta and this test is being used in a limited number of real-world settings. It is important to note that these rapid POC testing technologies are not as sensitive and are limited in their testing capacity when compared with the existing diagnostic test currently used in the province. Due to their limitations, rapid POC tests cannot replace all existing testing and public health measures, and instead will be used to augment current testing program. The Government of Alberta, in partnership with Alberta Health Services, is committed to monitoring evolving testing evidence and technology to improve our testing approach.”
The National Microbiology Lab is Canada’s Level Four lab which signifies that they are able to safely test and respond to the world’s most dangerous infectious diseases such as the Ebola virus, toxigenic e-coli and also highly pathogenic influenzas. They were briefly mentioned in a 2019 ouster/defection of Chinese scientists including Xiangguo Qiu who was escorted out of the Winnipeg lab in July for a possible “policy breach.” Qiuu was invited to go to the Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory of the Chinese Academy of Sciences twice a year for two years, for up to two weeks each time from 2017 to 2019. It has been suggested that this may be the source of the Wuhan Virus (Covid 2019).
Globally, PCR testing is considered to be the ‘gold standard,’ with high accuracy dependant on the sampling methodology. Yet the CDC has noted that false negatives are more prevalent than false positives. We must also consider the publicized case of Elon Musk who tested 4 times, 2 negative and 2 positive and the 50 % false results. Other studies have posited that accuracy may be as low as 10% or as high as 90%, with 20% being more common with 34 cycles for the test.
According to a British Columbia Centre for Disease Control report AND a FDA report, their evidence does not support the ‘gold standard,’ but rather that “The CT scan is not a gold standard for diagnosis of Covid 19 and scan cannot differentiate amongst the many microbiological causes of pneumonia.” (https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download)
However, there is one salient point that detection of Covid 19 is dependant upon a purified sample from a patient that is not mixed with monkey or bovine material. To date, no pure samples are available and upon questioning of 34 jurisdictions (Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Scotland, the United Kingdom, United States (CDC) and others as shared on:
Health Canada has no record of “COVID-19 virus” isolation – Fluoride Free Peel
So, the question can be asked again, if the CDC does not have a pure sample and Health Canada does not have a pure sample, how can tests and vaccinations be produced? It has been noted widely that it took decades for Polio, the Influenza and other vaccines to be produced, yet we have hundreds of potential miracle cures for Covid 19 in less than a year? You have to wonder what kind of research and testing has been done? Is it possible that this really is a manmade virus (that is patented by the CDC) therefore a vaccine can be produced as the model IS known?
One potential answer given for the rapid development of vaccines is the similarity of Covid 19 to SARS and MERS. Promising research has indicated the presence of an E gene (Protein) that accompanies the virus which seems to accelerate its spread or to act as a retardant and which may be the key to halting its reach.
However, as noted, how long does good testing and development take that does not endanger human lives with potentially fatal unintended consequences?
There is another big story that has not been reported in Western media. In early November, the Portuguese courts have ruled that the PCR process is not a reliable test for Sars-Cov-2, and therefore any enforced quarantine based on those test results is unlawful and a violation of constitutional rights.
In addition, during their decision they cited a European study that showed that if more than 35 cycles are used in the test that the probability of actually detecting ‘real’ Covid 19 is 3 % and a 97 % probability for a false positive detection.
Portuguese Court Rules PCR Tests “Unreliable” & Quarantines “Unlawful”
The big question is, if we believe that a vaccine can help the world in the fight against Covid 19 in so quick a time and that desperate measures are justified in this fight against this unseen (and potentially imaginary) enemy then we are ripe for the Great Reset which has come into public knowledge this year under the guise of medical emergence, a fact which Justin Trudeau himself has made reference to at the UN in September!
If we hearken back to basic science and believe that vaccines cannot stop virus infections but rather good nutrition and healthy immune systems lead to efficient patient recoveries, then the citizens of the world will be able to counter the biological war that is in our borders.
To end off the thread on which this discussion started, on November 27, 2020 my family received a letter from my mothers’ retirement home (Revera) that calm states the following:
November 27, 2020
Dear Resident/Family Member at Aspen Ridge
I am writing to you to confirm that we have had no other residents at Aspen Ridge test
positive for COVID-19. With that being said, we have taken many residents off isolation today
due to a clerical error from AHS that resulted in a false positive reporting.
With that teaser, look for part II of Positive Corona Virus Diagnosis Errors…
Please feel free to read the first part of this series
The Dystopian Future of Canada, Part 2-Corona Virus Testing Cause or Curse? – Todayville
COVID-19
Former Trudeau minister faces censure for ‘deliberately lying’ about Emergencies Act invocation
From LifeSiteNews
By Christina Maas of Reclaim The Net
Trudeau’s former public safety minister, Marco Mendicino, finds himself at the center of controversy as the Canadian Parliament debates whether to formally censure him for ‘deliberately lying’ about the justification for invoking the Emergencies Act.
Trudeau’s former public safety minister, Marco Mendicino, finds himself at the center of controversy as the Canadian Parliament debates whether to formally censure him for “deliberately lying” about the justification for invoking the Emergencies Act and freezing the bank accounts of civil liberties supporters during the 2022 Freedom Convoy protests.
Conservative MP Glen Motz, a vocal critic, emphasized the importance of accountability, stating, “Parliament deserves to receive clear and definitive answers to questions. We must be entitled to the truth.”
The Emergencies Act, invoked on February 14, 2022, granted sweeping powers to law enforcement, enabling them to arrest demonstrators, conduct searches, and freeze the financial assets of those involved in or supported, the trucker-led protests. However, questions surrounding the legality of its invocation have lingered, with opposition parties and legal experts criticizing the move as excessive and unwarranted.
On Thursday, Mendicino faced calls for censure after Blacklock’s Reporter revealed formal accusations of contempt of Parliament against him. The former minister, who was removed from cabinet in 2023, stands accused of misleading both MPs and the public by falsely claiming that the decision to invoke the Emergencies Act was based on law enforcement advice. A final report on the matter contradicts his testimony, stating, “The Special Joint Committee was intentionally misled.”
Mendicino’s repeated assertions at the time, including statements like, “We invoked the Emergencies Act after we received advice from law enforcement,” have been flatly contradicted by all other evidence. Despite this, he has yet to publicly challenge the allegations.
The controversy deepened as documents and testimony revealed discrepancies in the government’s handling of the crisis. While Attorney General Arif Virani acknowledged the existence of a written legal opinion regarding the Act’s invocation, he cited solicitor-client privilege to justify its confidentiality. Opposition MPs, including New Democrat Matthew Green, questioned the lack of transparency. “So you are both the client and the solicitor?” Green asked, to which Virani responded, “I wear different hats.”
The invocation of the Act has since been ruled unconstitutional by a federal court, a decision the Trudeau government is appealing. Critics argue that the lack of transparency and apparent misuse of power set a dangerous precedent. The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms echoed these concerns, emphasizing that emergency powers must be exercised only under exceptional circumstances and with a clear legal basis.
Reprinted with permission from Reclaim The Net.
From LifeSiteNews
By David James
‘I am free, I am no longer suspended. I can prescribe Ivermectin, and most importantly – and this is what AHPRA is most afraid of – I can criticize the vaccines freely … as a medical practitioner of this country,’ said COVID critic Dr. William Bay.
A long-awaited decision regarding the suspension of the medical registration of Dr William Bay by the Medical Board of Australia has been handed down by the Queensland Supreme Court. Justice Thomas Bradley overturned the suspension, finding that Bay had been subject to “bias and failure to afford fair process” over complaints unrelated to his clinical practice.
The case was important because it reversed the brutal censorship of medical practitioners, which had forced many doctors into silence during the COVID crisis to avoid losing their livelihoods.
Bay and his supporters were jubilant after the decision. “The judgement in the matter of Bay versus AHPRA (Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency) and the state of Queensland has just been handed down, and we have … absolute and complete victory,” he proclaimed outside the court. “I am free, I am no longer suspended. I can prescribe Ivermectin, and most importantly – and this is what AHPRA is most afraid of – I can criticize the vaccines freely … as a medical practitioner of this country.”
Bay went on: “The vaccines are bad, the vaccines are no good, and people should be afforded the right to informed consent to choose these so-called vaccines. Doctors like me will be speaking out because we have nothing to fear.”
Bay added that the judge ruled not only to reinstate his registration, but also set aside the investigation into him, deeming it invalid. He also forced AHPRA to pay the legal costs. “Everything is victorious for myself, and I praise God,” he said.
The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA), which partners the Medical Board of Australia, is a body kept at arm’s length from the government to prevent legal and political accountability. It was able to decide which doctors could be deregistered for allegedly not following the government line. If asked questions about its decisions AHPRA would reply that it was not a Commonwealth agency so there was no obligation to respond.
The national board of AHPRA is composed of two social workers, one accountant, one physiotherapist, one mathematician and three lawyers. Even the Australian Medical Association, which also aggressively threatened dissenting doctors during COVID, has objected to its role. Vice-president Dr Chris Moy described the powers given to AHPRA as being “in the realms of incoherent zealotry”.
This was the apparatus that Bay took on, and his victory is a significant step towards allowing medical practitioners to voice their concerns about Covid and the vaccines. Until now, most doctors, at least those still in a job, have had to keep any differing views to themselves. As Bay suggests, that meant they abrogated their duty to ensure patients gave informed consent.
Justice Bradley said the AHPRA board’s regulatory role did not “include protection of government and regulatory agencies from political criticism.” To that extent the decision seems to allow freedom of speech for medical practitioners. But AHPRA still has the power to deregister doctors without any accountability. And if there is one lesson from Covid it is that bureaucrats in the Executive branch have little respect for legal or ethical principles.
READ: More scientists are supporting a swift recall of the dangerous COVID jabs
It is to be hoped that Australian medicos who felt forced into silence now begin to speak out about the vaccines, the mandating of which has coincided with a dramatic rise in all-cause mortality in heavily vaccinated countries around the world, including Australia. This may prove psychologically difficult, though, because those doctors would then have to explain why they have changed their position, a discussion they will no doubt prefer to avoid.
The Bay decision has implications for the way the three arms of government: the legislature, the executive and the judiciary, function in Australia. There are supposed to be checks and balances, but the COVID crisis revealed that, when put under stress, the separation of powers does not work well, or at all.
During the crisis the legislature routinely passed off its responsibilities to the executive branch, which removed any voter influence because bureaucrats are not elected. The former premier of Victoria, Daniel Andrews, went a step further by illegitimately giving himself and the Health Minister positions in the executive branch, when all they were entitled to was roles in the legislature as members of the party in power. This appalling move resulted in the biggest political protests ever seen in Melbourne, yet the legislation passed anyway.
The legislature’s abrogation of responsibility left the judiciary as the only branch of government able to address the abuse of Australia’s foundational political institutions. To date, the judges have disappointed. But the Bay decision may be a sign of better things to come.
READ: Just 24% of Americans plan to receive the newest COVID shot: poll
Proposed $70 billion AI data centre in MD of Greenview could launch an incredible new chapter for western Canadian energy
Australian doctor who criticized COVID jabs has his suspension reversed
Massive growth in federal workforce contributes to Ottawa’s red ink
A Potpourri of the World’s Unexposed Scandals
-
Alberta1 day ago
Proposed $70 billion AI data centre in MD of Greenview could launch an incredible new chapter for western Canadian energy
-
COVID-192 days ago
Australian doctor who criticized COVID jabs has his suspension reversed
-
Business2 days ago
Massive growth in federal workforce contributes to Ottawa’s red ink
-
Alberta21 hours agoYour towing rights! AMA unveils measures to help fight predatory towing
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy2 days agoFalse Claims, Real Consequences: The ICC Referrals That Damaged Canada’s Reputation
-
COVID-192 days ago
Former Trudeau minister faces censure for ‘deliberately lying’ about Emergencies Act invocation
-
National2 days agoWhen’s the election? Singh finally commits. Poilievre asks Governor General to step in
-
Daily Caller2 days agoParty Leaders Exposed For ‘Lying’ About Biden Health