There's no question coronaviruses exists and are pesky little critters that along with other microorganisms are responsible for an array of yearly ongoing respiratory infections. But recent evidence is raising the question over the accuracy of the COVID-19 testing.
Below is a video presentation from Dr. Andrew Kaufman, MD. Dr. Kaufman has been researching the COVID-19 pandemic from the start of the outbreak in Wuhan, China, and has recently developed an intriguing theory as to what is going on. It is a must watch for anyone who has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and seeking more answers.
In case you're wondering, Dr. Kaufman is more than qualified to talk about this subject. He is licensed and board certified in Psychiatry and Forensic Psychiatry. He holds a degree in medicine from Medical University of South Carolina, and a degree in biology from MIT. He mentions his credentials and other qualifications at the start of the video.
The information presented in the video is very easy to follow, so you don't need to be a doctor or researcher to understand it. If you're have trouble playing back the video, or its easier for you to read about new things, further down on the page you'll find a summary of the information in writing that includes additional research and commentaries.
Background to COVID-19 Testing
According to Chinese government authorites, the first 198 people diagnosed with COVID-19 reported becoming mysteriously ill with respiratory symptoms that resembled a type of pneumonia. Most of the early subjects had contact history at a very big open-air seafood market in Wuhan, China, with many being employed or making a living working there.
As is common in many of these types of Chinese markets, the conditions of the market in Wuhan are less-than sanitary. Safety guidelines for minimizing cross-contamination appear to be missing, with both live and dead animals, including animal body parts and fluids, being laid about in unsterilized containers or on the ground, and handled without the use of protective gear. To say the least, probability of cross-contamination and infection is very high.
After investigating, Chinese government authorities announced that doctors and clinicians had determined the mysterious illness was induced by a virus based on clinical symptoms and other criteria including body temperature, rising lymphocytes, lower white blood cells, congested fluids in the lungs confirmed through x-ray, and no improvement after treatment with antibiotics. The high probability that the symptoms were due to poisoning from cross-contaminated meats and other food at the market, or other causes, were never investigated.
To confirm it was indeed a virus causing the mystery illness, Chinese scientists focused on examining lung fluid collected from 7 of the 198 subjects. But instead of trying to separate a virus from the lung fluid as is indicated by standard protocol, they first began searching for and separating genetic material from the samples. Not surprisingly, they discovered ribonucleic acid (RNA) within it, which is not uncommon to find (see below).
They then sequenced the genetic material and found its code, determining all the base pairs and the ordering of that sequence.
Finally, without ever proving a virus existed in the fluid or from where the genetic material came from, they rushed to rapidly develop a qualitative reverse-transcription (RT) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) diagnostic test and shared this test globally via the World Health Organization (WHO).
The Missing Virus
... as far as some researchers can tell, a COVID-19 virus has never been purified and separated from the fluid that was used to create the RT-PCR test that is now being used to confirm infection.
The diagnostic test (RT-PCR) the Chinese scientists developed and is currently being used the world over to determine infection with COVID-19 does not test for the virus but instead tests for a specific RNA sequence.
This is a problem because, first and foremost, the RNA sequence being used has not been determined to have come from a virus. In fact, as far as many researchers can tell, a COVID-19 virus has never been purified and separated from the fluid that was used to create the RT-PCR test that is now being used to confirm infection.
In order to know for sure that the genetic material came directly from a virus, the first scientists should have (in this order):
- Collected lung fluid from those people who had fallen ill with this pneumonia-like illness.
- If found, purified out a virus particle from this lung fluid that can be identified.
- Sequenced out the genetic material from the found virus to determine its specific RNA code.
Following these steps would have established the required "gold standard" and control group (non-infected subjects) that is necessary to determine the validity of the RT-PCR test. This is critical because, since no test is perfect, an accurate error-rate would be determined.
However the current RT-PCR test has never been tested against a "gold standard" because a COVID-19 virus was never found and isolated, and subsequently never had its genetic material sequenced. Since there is no "gold standard" to be able to calculate the accuracy of findings, the accuracy of the test is unknown.
This is likely the reason why some US doctors and medical experts are reporting about a 20% (or more) false-negative rate. False-negatives are produced when people do not test positive for COVID-19 even though they present with obvious clinical symptoms that indicate an upper respiratory infection is present. This means that about 1 of 5 times the test is producing negative results when there is actually symptoms or illness that they expect to produce positive test results.
More concerning is that according to some estimates the test is also likely producing about an 80% false-positive rate!
This means that if someone got tested or was asked to get tested because they were exposed to someone who tested positive, or they were traveling, etc, 4 of 5 times the test would be producing positive results when there would actually be no symptoms or illness.
This is certainly a big error as it could be vastly overestimating the total number of cases and causing a lot of problems for people given the current quarantine and social-distancing situation.
More Errors With COVID-19 Testing
If we take a closer look at the RT-PCR test being used to test for the alleged COVID-19 virus, there's actually even a greater margin of error.
RT-PCR tests can be likened to finding a needle in a haystack. They basically work by causing a reaction that copies and enlarges the RNA that is found in sampled fluid.
RNA is very small and there's often only a little bit of this genetic material that is found within the other stuff in the sampled fluid. So in order to clearly determine what is being looked at, the RNA needs to be copied and enlarged exponentially, generally about between 25-30 cycles more than its original size.
With the COVID-19 tests, an amplification of 45 cycyles is what is being used, which is the maximum limit of what is recommended to be used to get an accurate result. However by exponentially amplifying the genetic material to this maximum magnitude, the RT-PCR tests also exponentially amplifies the surrounding noise.
As a result, the slightest error in measurement or the slightest contamination can also result in errors of enormous magnitude, very similar to what we're seeing with the COVID-19 testing.
Getting to Know Exosomes
... in every possible important way, the alleged COVID-19 virus that has been amplified and identified by the RT-PCR test appears to be the exact same structure as an exosome. Both are found in lung fluid, both contain RNA, both share the same diameter size inside the cell (500 nanometers) and outside the cell (100 nanometers), and both attach to the same cell receptors (ACE-2).
In our bodies, at any given time, there is quite a bit of free flowing genetic material circulating in the blood and body fluids. This genetic material can come from any number of structures in our bodies, such as small fluid sacs (vesicles), immune cells, bacteria, viruses, etc.
But within the blood and body fluids, there is also these very small lesser-known structures called exosomes. Exosomes are released by cells on a regular day-to-day basis as part of the response of a cell being damaged or poisoned. They function much like a sponge would. For a period of time exosomes can stop toxins from burrowing through cell membrane by destroying and preventing these poisons from damaging the tissue.
Almost every kind of insult to the body will cause cells to release exosomes, including toxic substances (ie heavy metals, organic chemicals, bacterial, etc), stress and fear, cancer (ie lung cancer), ionizing radiation, infection, injury, immune response, asthma, microwave electromagnetic radiation, and other unspecified diseases.
Once exosomes have identified and begun to corral any toxins deemed harmful, they will be circulated around the body. Using a lock and key mechanism, exosomes will then search for targeted cells to communicate with as a means of preventing these similar cells from being damaged by toxic substances that have been previously identified.
But the most important thing to know is the fact that, in every possible important way, the alleged COVID-19 virus that has been amplified and identified by the RT-PCR test appears to be the exact same structure as an exosome. Both are found in lung fluid, both contain RNA, both share the same diameter size inside the cell (500 nanometers) and outside the cell (100 nanometers), and both attach to the same cell receptors (ACE-2).
This brings into question whether or not the current COVID-19 tests are actually looking at particles of a new coronavirus strain or if they are instead looking at exosomes that have been released and are circulating in the fluid as a result of a laundry list of symptoms and diseases, including intensified levels of stress and fear.
Why Rapid Recovery Is Occuring With Non-Traditional Treatments
At the very least, these findings and correlations with exosomes help explain why certain people that have been allegedly infected with COVID-19 are actually experiencing rapid recovery using certain non-traditional treatments that are not typically recognized for treating viral infections.
This includes several reports of patients supposedly infected with COVID-19 responding favorably to hydroxychloroquine, the anti-malarial drug. Although it is unclear exactly how hydroxychloroquine works, research suggests it may work by releasing lysozomal enzymes into cells. Just like the enzymes in the digestive system breakdown and recycle food particles, lysosomal enzymes breakdown and recycle toxins and anything else that is no longer needed in the cell. While this drug can be quite damaging to the cell itself (there have been reports of people dying from using it), if the cell has been inundated with toxins it may indeed be useful.
The other non-traditional treatment that has been reported to be quite successful in helping speed up recovery in those alleged to be infected with COVID-19 is vitamin C. While it does have some affect on immune related functions, vitamin C is a powerful antioxidant and its ability to help reduce damage from free-radicals (oxidative stress) caused by toxic substances in the blood is very likely why it has been improving recovery times.
Why COVID-19 Related Deaths Are On the Rise
These finding and correlations would also explain why reported deaths related to COVID-19 are occurring in people with preexisting conditions and/or weakened immune systems. If the COVID-19 tests are finding exosomes instead of an actual coronavirus, it is highly probable that many of the deaths said to have been caused by COVID-19 may actually have been due to heart disease or any number of other chronic diseases that top the list of mortality in the US, including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, influenza, pneumonia, and others.
As I mentioned in a previous article titled, "You're More Likely To Die From This Pandemic Disease Than COVID-19", throughout the outbreak, US health officials at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have not been very specific about instructing hospitals to separate data of those who have been diagnosed with COVID-19 and then died, from those people who had preexisting conditions and were infected then died. In fact, the CDC has emphasized "that Coronavirus Disease 2019 or COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed [empasis added] to have caused or contributed to death" (CDC, "Guidance for Certifying COVID-19 Deaths," 2020).
This is a very important detail to understand as it can greatly distort and inflate the actual number of deaths being caused specifically by COVID-19, particularly if the tests are looking for exosomes and not a virus.
The implications of correct testing for COVID-19 is important because without it there's no way of knowing exactly what is causing illness in some people, nor what is leading to death in others. Without proper testing, there's also no way of knowing whether or not social distancing measures are necessary or effective.
Most people very likely don't want to be labeled erroneously and risk being quarantined or detained for no reason. But as people from all over the world are being asked to voluntarily, and now in some cases being legally ordered, to self-isolate and distance themselves from others, they should demand to know exactly what they're being tested for and the accuracy of that test.
- Elegant, N.X. (2020). Why are patients who recover from coronavirus getting it again? Fortune. Retrieved from https://fortune.com/2020/03/06/coronavirus-recover-test-positive-twice/ .
- Ioannidis, J.P.A. (2020). A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data. STAT. Retrieved from https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/ .
- Ioannidis, J.P.A. (2020). Coronavirus disease 2019: The harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures. Eur J Clin Invest, 50: e13222. doi:10.1111/eci.13222 . Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/eci.13222 .
- Gallagher, J. (2020). Are coronavirus test flawed? BBC News. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51491763 .
- Krieger, L. (2020). Coronavirus false test results: With the push to screen come questions of accuracy. The Mercury News. Retrieved from https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/19/coronavirus-false-test-results-with-the-push-to-screen-come-questions-of-accuracy/ .
- Kaufman, A. (2020). Covid-19, A Breakdown on Current Testing Procedures [Video file]. Retrieved from https://vimeo.com/403557718 .
- Lazar, K and Ryan, A. (2020). How accurate are coronavirus tests? Doctors raise concern about ‘false-negative’ results. The Boston Globe. Retrieved from https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/04/02/nation/how-accurate-are-coronavirus-tests-doctors-raise-concern-about-false-negative-results/ .
- Lichtenstein, K. (2020). Are coronavirus tests accurate? MedicineNet. Retrieved from https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=228250 .
- Manrai, A.K. and Mandl, K.D. (2020). Covid-19 testing: overcoming challenges in the next phase of the epidemic. STAT. Retrieved from https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/31/covid-19-overcoming-testing-challenges/ .