The problem as I understand it with COVID antibody tests are the cross reactions with IgM antibodies of other common cold viruses. And if antibodies are present they are evidence of a past infection to which you have mounted a successful immune response. So what, pray tell, is the point of determining that you WERE sick but now you're no…
The problem as I understand it with COVID antibody tests are the cross reactions with IgM antibodies of other common cold viruses. And if antibodies are present they are evidence of a past infection to which you have mounted a successful immune response. So what, pray tell, is the point of determining that you WERE sick but now you're not. I'd think you would know that anyway. The CDC explains it like this by way of rationalizing antibody tests: "You can have COVID and not know it." That would apply to about 90 percent of "COVID positives"; they weren't sick. But they can still transmit The COVID to others who would presumably have a 90 percent chance of not being sick. But that could have been prevented if they had, as the drug adverts say, Asked Their Doctor who would have tested them and told them they were sick even though they weren't sick. COVID "logic". As I recall the antibody tests used during the AIDS era were ELISA followed up with a "confirmatory" Western Blot. One unverifiable test "confirmed" by an equally unverifiable test. Are the same tests used for COVID? They used antibody reactions to certain proteins that were '"assumed" to be "specific" to "HIV". However there was no way of knowing which proteins, if any, were specific to HIV since the elusive HIV had never been properly isolated/purified and characterized despite a "Roman effort" by Luc Montagnier at the Pasteur Institute. They gave him the Nobel Prize anyway. 25 years later. Strange. In addition if the proteins (I believe there were 12 in the ELISA test) were truly "HIV-specific" would not one reaction suffice to indicate (past) infection? The test required four reactions. This was not standardized, in Africa only two reactions were required. So theoretically an HIV - positive African could revert to negative by coming to the US. Not a trivial matter since an HIV positive diagnosis was considered a death sentence. It gets worse; the ELISA tests especially were notorious for cross-reacting to various and sundry diseases and conditions. Multi-parous women for instance were known to produce "false positive" test results (How could they know? What does that even mean?). In Central Africa women have on average six pregnancies during their lifetimes. The testing there involved pooling the blood of numerous women and testing it and, voila, ping for positive. On that basis Africa was declared to be in the grips of an "epidemic of biblical proportions" (OMG!) primarily affecting young adults of child-bearing age and so a population collapse was predicted. In fact the opposite occurred, the population of Africa exploded. And so on. I see I'm holding forth. Science is now science fiction, they make it up as they go. And modern medicine is a sick joke. There are exceptions such as yourself. Thank you for your good work
That's great info on the HIV/AIDS atibody tests and the Affrican testing protocols. AB tests are a big deal with Covid, per my Spidey Sense. The ELISA tests are supposed to be the "gold standard." I've identified tons of people who tested positive with an ELISA antibody test. Yes, the criticism of the tests is they are producing false positives from "cross reactivity." That might be the case in some people ... but I doubt every positive antibody test was a "false positive." I bet we really had more "false negatives."
The African protocols didn't involve testing for the most part but diagnoses were rendered mostly on the basis of clinical presentation using a specific definition of AIDS. There were numerous such definitions, the American one involved the expression of some 30+ diseases and conditions, everything from diarrhea to dementia to cervical cancer to nothing at all. These conditions had to be expressed with "HIV" present but then they came out with another definition that eliminated the "HIV" requirement! Then they eliminated the disease requirement! By 1997 nearly two-thirds of patients diagnosed with AIDS weren't even sick, they were in "good health". The first time in medical history that people were diagnosed with an allegedly 100 percent fatal disease on the basis of "good health". Until COVID that is. The CDC fixed this by no longer reporting the AIDS figures. Out of sight, out of mind. In Africa AIDS was diagnosed using the so-called "Bangui" definition which included diarrhea and persistent cough. Not exactly rare in Africa, where as one real scientist pointed out "Everybody has malaria". Also TB. The WHO estimates that half of all Africans have been exposed to TB and therefore have TB antibodies. So if an African has TB is it "AIDS TB" or "TB Classic"? There is no way of knowing without using diagnostically worthless tests that generate "false positives" and, as you mentioned, presumably false negatives as well. Whatever those terms even mean. "Science" marches on
In "The Real Anthony Fauci," RFK, Jr. points out that in Africa AIDS/HIV was a disease that infected everyone (including more females and children), while in America this virus, for some reason, only killed promiscuous homosexuals and IV drug users who share needles.
So why is the disease/virus different on different continents?
The problem as I understand it with COVID antibody tests are the cross reactions with IgM antibodies of other common cold viruses. And if antibodies are present they are evidence of a past infection to which you have mounted a successful immune response. So what, pray tell, is the point of determining that you WERE sick but now you're not. I'd think you would know that anyway. The CDC explains it like this by way of rationalizing antibody tests: "You can have COVID and not know it." That would apply to about 90 percent of "COVID positives"; they weren't sick. But they can still transmit The COVID to others who would presumably have a 90 percent chance of not being sick. But that could have been prevented if they had, as the drug adverts say, Asked Their Doctor who would have tested them and told them they were sick even though they weren't sick. COVID "logic". As I recall the antibody tests used during the AIDS era were ELISA followed up with a "confirmatory" Western Blot. One unverifiable test "confirmed" by an equally unverifiable test. Are the same tests used for COVID? They used antibody reactions to certain proteins that were '"assumed" to be "specific" to "HIV". However there was no way of knowing which proteins, if any, were specific to HIV since the elusive HIV had never been properly isolated/purified and characterized despite a "Roman effort" by Luc Montagnier at the Pasteur Institute. They gave him the Nobel Prize anyway. 25 years later. Strange. In addition if the proteins (I believe there were 12 in the ELISA test) were truly "HIV-specific" would not one reaction suffice to indicate (past) infection? The test required four reactions. This was not standardized, in Africa only two reactions were required. So theoretically an HIV - positive African could revert to negative by coming to the US. Not a trivial matter since an HIV positive diagnosis was considered a death sentence. It gets worse; the ELISA tests especially were notorious for cross-reacting to various and sundry diseases and conditions. Multi-parous women for instance were known to produce "false positive" test results (How could they know? What does that even mean?). In Central Africa women have on average six pregnancies during their lifetimes. The testing there involved pooling the blood of numerous women and testing it and, voila, ping for positive. On that basis Africa was declared to be in the grips of an "epidemic of biblical proportions" (OMG!) primarily affecting young adults of child-bearing age and so a population collapse was predicted. In fact the opposite occurred, the population of Africa exploded. And so on. I see I'm holding forth. Science is now science fiction, they make it up as they go. And modern medicine is a sick joke. There are exceptions such as yourself. Thank you for your good work
That's great info on the HIV/AIDS atibody tests and the Affrican testing protocols. AB tests are a big deal with Covid, per my Spidey Sense. The ELISA tests are supposed to be the "gold standard." I've identified tons of people who tested positive with an ELISA antibody test. Yes, the criticism of the tests is they are producing false positives from "cross reactivity." That might be the case in some people ... but I doubt every positive antibody test was a "false positive." I bet we really had more "false negatives."
The African protocols didn't involve testing for the most part but diagnoses were rendered mostly on the basis of clinical presentation using a specific definition of AIDS. There were numerous such definitions, the American one involved the expression of some 30+ diseases and conditions, everything from diarrhea to dementia to cervical cancer to nothing at all. These conditions had to be expressed with "HIV" present but then they came out with another definition that eliminated the "HIV" requirement! Then they eliminated the disease requirement! By 1997 nearly two-thirds of patients diagnosed with AIDS weren't even sick, they were in "good health". The first time in medical history that people were diagnosed with an allegedly 100 percent fatal disease on the basis of "good health". Until COVID that is. The CDC fixed this by no longer reporting the AIDS figures. Out of sight, out of mind. In Africa AIDS was diagnosed using the so-called "Bangui" definition which included diarrhea and persistent cough. Not exactly rare in Africa, where as one real scientist pointed out "Everybody has malaria". Also TB. The WHO estimates that half of all Africans have been exposed to TB and therefore have TB antibodies. So if an African has TB is it "AIDS TB" or "TB Classic"? There is no way of knowing without using diagnostically worthless tests that generate "false positives" and, as you mentioned, presumably false negatives as well. Whatever those terms even mean. "Science" marches on
In "The Real Anthony Fauci," RFK, Jr. points out that in Africa AIDS/HIV was a disease that infected everyone (including more females and children), while in America this virus, for some reason, only killed promiscuous homosexuals and IV drug users who share needles.
So why is the disease/virus different on different continents?