Since the peak of this so-called second wave on January 8th, where a little over 68,000 COVID-19 infections were reported in the UK, we have seen a rapid decline in infections, over 50% in fact in just a couple weeks.
What happened? Did the Lockdown and the wearing of Face masks do the job they were intended to do?
Are we Testing less?
Skeptics might first point to the number of tests being performed, however unlike many of the previous declines and inclines in infection rates, the number of tests has actually increased in the past couple weeks. In fact, on January 27th we saw the UK perform the highest number of tests so far in this pandemic with a whopping 750,000 tests performed.
So testing less, we certainly are not. Infections rates are actually declining as testing reaches it’s highest levels.
Has The Threshold For Infection Changed?
A COVID-19 Infection is determined by a positive result from a PCR-test, no symptoms required. So the question is, what determines a positive result on the PCR tests?
Well, the inventor of the test, Kary Mullis had this to say:
PCR detects a very small segment of the nucleic acid, which is part of a virus itself. The specific fragment detected is determined by the somewhat arbitrary choice of DNA primers used, which become the ends of the amplified fragment. “
If things were done right, “infection” would be a far cry from a positive PCR test – uncoverdc.com
and bio-chemist, protease developer, and founder of an EM lab called Viral Forensics, Doctor David Rasnick said:
“You don’t start with testing; you start with listening to the lungs. I’m skeptical that a PCR test is ever true. It’s a great scientific research tool. It’s a horrible tool for clinical medicine. 30% of your infected cells have been killed before you show symptoms. By the time you show symptoms…the dead cells are generating the symptoms.” – uncoverdc.com
So it is clear the test itself is a flawed tool when used for mass testing during a pandemic, however this has been true throughout the pandemic, so while the numbers may be inaccurate, they would have been consistently accurate throughout, unless the cycle threshold is changed.
Just to give you a better understanding of how this works, I’ll refer back to a previous article I published:
Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) works by taking nucleotides, these are tiny fragments of DNA or RNA, and then replicate them until they become something large enough to identify.
This replication is done in cycles, with each cycle doubling the amount of genetic material.
Cycle threshold is the number of cycles it takes until something identifiable can be found.
The fewer cycles it takes to discover something identifiable, the more likely that what is found is of significance. – OYE NEWS
The Cycle Threshold or as it is often referred to, Ct, is critical to accuracy. Transparency on what Ct value determines a positive case has been a topic of much secrecy throughout the pandemic. While the value can be obtained upon request in many cases, clarity on exactly what the threshold is to determine a positive case has been shrouded in mystery.
It is thought that for most of the World, a Ct value of between 30 – 40 is used to determine a positive infection.
Anthony Fauci even stated that values of 35 and over are going to be detecting “dead nucleotides” not a live virus:
Is it possible this critical mechanism for determining a ‘Positive Case’ has been adjusted?
Is there any reason to suspect that it might have changed?
On January 13th 2021 the WHO released the following statement:
WHO requests users to follow the instructions for use (IFU) when interpreting results for specimens tested using PCR methodology. – WHO
Simply put, this was a request put out by the World Health Organisation to ‘follow instructions’ when interpreting results from a PCR test.
The notice goes on to say:
WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.
WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity. – WHO
So in other words, we need to set the Cycle threshold lower. But of course, we have little clue to how these test results have been interpreted throughout.
Is it mere coincidence that around the same time the WHO issues this statement, the number of infections plummet?
The very fact that the Government is not being transparent on this would indicate that this is the very control mechanism they are using to justify their reaction to this pandemic. ‘Look infections have gone up now we have come out of Lockdown; look now, infections are going down now that we have re-entered Lockdown!’
Others might point to the Vaccine as the reason for the recent decline in infections, and I’d argue that this is exactly what they want you to believe.
Are The Vaccines Reducing Infections?
Firstly, I should point out that there is no evidence whatsoever from the manufacturer’s clinical trials that any of the Vaccines reduce the spread of the virus, merely reduce symptoms.
But let’s just for argument’s sake assume some level of reduction in infection rates is achieved by use of the vaccine, few people have had their second dose yet and this second-dose is critical:
A study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, found that vaccine efficacy between the first and second doses was 52%.
A 50% reduction of infections within 30 days of the vaccine being rolled out is just not going to happen, wishful thinking springs to mind.
Infections Down – Deaths Up?
Infections have decreased by 50% over the past couple weeks, and yet deaths are showing no sign of a pullback, in fact we have seen some of the highest numbers ever.
At the peak of the second wave the 7 day average for deaths was 809. Two weeks later, with a 50% reduction in infections, we see the 7 day average for deaths at 1177
This supports the theory that the most likely reason for the decrease in infections can be put down to a change in the testing interpretation.
At this point though, it’s all speculation. As soon as I can confirm what the UK’s testing protocols are to determine a positive infection – I will let you know.
Leave your comments below