Read on Twitter
Co-Author Olfert Landt is CEO of TIB-Molbiol.
“by Jan. 10 he’d introduced a viable test kit. His phone hasn’t stopped ringing since.”
“Everyone here is putting in 12- to 14-hour shifts,”
"TIB’s revenue in February tripled from the same month in 2019"
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-12/a-berlin-biotech-company-got-a-head-start-on-coronavirus-tests
15
“by Jan. 10 he’d introduced a viable test kit. His phone hasn’t stopped ringing since.”
“Everyone here is putting in 12- to 14-hour shifts,”
"TIB’s revenue in February tripled from the same month in 2019"
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-12/a-berlin-biotech-company-got-a-head-start-on-coronavirus-tests
15
A Group of Scientists in Life Sciences wrote a Retraction Request given the severe damage on society with a PCR test that is not well calibrated. Their arguments seemed logical and the severe flaws of the Drosten paper appeared shocking, even to me
https://cormandrostenreview.com/retraction-request-letter-to-eurosurveillance-editorial-board/
16/
https://cormandrostenreview.com/retraction-request-letter-to-eurosurveillance-editorial-board/
16/
- Extremely high concentrations of primers
- No discrimination between viral fragments and a live virus
- No max Ct value given, but 45 cycles stated
- No unique positive control, nor negative control
- Test is non-specific (where has flu gone?)
- No standardized approach
etc
17
- No discrimination between viral fragments and a live virus
- No max Ct value given, but 45 cycles stated
- No unique positive control, nor negative control
- Test is non-specific (where has flu gone?)
- No standardized approach
etc
17
The Eurosurveillance’s response took two months and I can summarize as follows:
-No scientific arguments published
-Peer reviewers were not made public
-Doesn't confirm conflicts of interests (there obviously are)
https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.5.2102041
18/
-No scientific arguments published
-Peer reviewers were not made public
-Doesn't confirm conflicts of interests (there obviously are)
https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.5.2102041
18/
For a test so embedded in society nowadays, wouldn’t you expect more?
Don’t we deserve more?
Anonymous peer reviewer @StephenABustin, noted in a podcast that he was a peer reviewer of the paper.
https://chironreturn.org/audio/210201-steve-bustin.mp3
19/
Don’t we deserve more?
Anonymous peer reviewer @StephenABustin, noted in a podcast that he was a peer reviewer of the paper.
https://chironreturn.org/audio/210201-steve-bustin.mp3
19/
Interestingly, Stephen Bustin testified under oath in 2000 in the Wakefield case. He was paid 225k GBP. 1500 hours(!) for an hourly rate of 150 GBP
The arguments that he used under oath can directly be applied for rejecting Drosten’s paper.
The case:
https://mega.nz/file/ocZAXBzS#WYyjaeZTigfPGuQp7N9Rdceiyiq-Wel3G75JueUfidk
20/
The arguments that he used under oath can directly be applied for rejecting Drosten’s paper.
The case:
https://mega.nz/file/ocZAXBzS#WYyjaeZTigfPGuQp7N9Rdceiyiq-Wel3G75JueUfidk
20/
Bustin made some shocking revelations in the podcast. For example, he didn’t even test the primers. Check out min 24.
How does the 24h peer review compare to the 1500 hour put into the research for the Wakefield case?
This PCR test imprisoned the Western Population.
21/
How does the 24h peer review compare to the 1500 hour put into the research for the Wakefield case?
This PCR test imprisoned the Western Population.
21/
Also, Stephen Bustin has conflicts of interests. Looking for funding for an extreme PCR. Does he benefit from more or less PCR tests?
https://twitter.com/StephenABustin/status/1339999348634075141
https://twitter.com/frostreports/status/1309449290843074566
22/
https://twitter.com/StephenABustin/status/1339999348634075141
https://twitter.com/frostreports/status/1309449290843074566
22/
@Kevin_McKernan points out the flipping of Stephen Bustin very well.
https://twitter.com/Kevin_McKernan/status/1357790150378590208
23/
https://twitter.com/Kevin_McKernan/status/1357790150378590208
23/
And here with the corresponding audio samples of the podcast and the Wakefield Case.
https://twitter.com/Kevin_McKernan/status/1359345102569811969
24/
https://twitter.com/Kevin_McKernan/status/1359345102569811969
24/
@MarionKoopmans from Dutch @RIVM and co-author, states that Retraction Request is settled.
Uh no??
To me this looks like you hired a 'scientist' without a moral compass, who changes his arguments based on the lumpsum of money that he is paid.
https://twitter.com/MarionKoopmans/status/1357378486386782209
25/
Uh no??
To me this looks like you hired a 'scientist' without a moral compass, who changes his arguments based on the lumpsum of money that he is paid.
https://twitter.com/MarionKoopmans/status/1357378486386782209
25/
Allegedly, the WHO protocol has been updated. But it seems the PCR test is still lacking significantly.
For example, in this paper from @RIVM, the target genes of the used tests are shown.
< 10% uses 3 target genes or more!
https://www.rivm.nl/sites/default/files/2021-02/EQA%20of%20Laboratories%20Performing%20SARS-CoV-2%20Diagnostics%20for%20the%20Dutch%20Population%20November-2020.pdf
26/
For example, in this paper from @RIVM, the target genes of the used tests are shown.
< 10% uses 3 target genes or more!
https://www.rivm.nl/sites/default/files/2021-02/EQA%20of%20Laboratories%20Performing%20SARS-CoV-2%20Diagnostics%20for%20the%20Dutch%20Population%20November-2020.pdf
26/
“Two is the minimum and I would be happy with three”, even Stephen Bustin says in the podcast at min 35-37. Three target genes are preferred for COVID19 specificity. Bustin even says if one is positive and one negative, they decide the test +.
27/
27/
Remember that Novacyt #NCYT happily announced in September 2020 to launch a two-gene test for countries that require this?
Now what is the real significance of their reported high specificity and sensitivity with only 1 or 2 gene targets?
https://novacyt.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Novacyt-launch-of-2-gene-COVID-19-test-ENG.pdf
29/
Now what is the real significance of their reported high specificity and sensitivity with only 1 or 2 gene targets?
https://novacyt.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Novacyt-launch-of-2-gene-COVID-19-test-ENG.pdf
29/
So, to repeat, I am not a microbiologist, but here I see two parties. One without vested interests, transparent and with scientific arguments. The other with huge vested interests, non-transparent and without publishing scientific arguments.
30/
30/
Therefore, I definitely was not impressed by the ‘rebuttal’ response of @Eurosurveillanc and all the other red flags that I’ve found. I decided to write the companies that I invested in to gain more knowledge about what was going on.
31/
31/
I got no real answer and was only told to look in the Handbook of the product, which I did.
Here is the handbook of the #NCYT Coronavirus COVID-19 genesig®Real-Time PCR assay:
https://www.genesig.com/assets/files/Path_COVID_19_CE_STED_IFU_Issue_500.pdf?timestamp=1612341535
32/
Here is the handbook of the #NCYT Coronavirus COVID-19 genesig®Real-Time PCR assay:
https://www.genesig.com/assets/files/Path_COVID_19_CE_STED_IFU_Issue_500.pdf?timestamp=1612341535
32/
Which, I did, and the results were not reassuring me. The #NCYT Handbook states 45 cycles. Which is far too high. This makes me seriously doubt the ethics of the company.
The high number of cycles is not even mentioned as a risk for false positives.
33/
The high number of cycles is not even mentioned as a risk for false positives.
33/
The PCR companies have a potentially very perverse revenue loop.
More positives -> track and trace -> contacts also need to do a PCR test -> more revenue.
Dangerous cycle with huge effect on whole society if TRUE that PCR test is not as reliable as thought
34/
More positives -> track and trace -> contacts also need to do a PCR test -> more revenue.
Dangerous cycle with huge effect on whole society if TRUE that PCR test is not as reliable as thought
34/
Critical questions should be asked to management. There should be clarification about specificity, target genes, Cycle Treshold (Ct), positive control and negative control. #NCYT
35/
35/
#ALERS still has not replied to my questions that I send them two weeks ago. Also, my reminder from a week ago must have slipped through.
When I congratulated the management on 2020 results and asked for clarification on margins it took the CFO only 6 hours to elaborate.
36/
When I congratulated the management on 2020 results and asked for clarification on margins it took the CFO only 6 hours to elaborate.
36/
@MarionKoopmans from @RIVM admits here that the PCR test only detects viral load instead of a live virus. She admits also that the PCR is less appropriate for deciding whether you are infectious.
37/
37/
Also van Dissel from @RIVM admits here that the PCR test only means that you have genetic material but not that you have a live virus. And therefore not, whether you are sick and infectious.
38/
38/
To conclude, our @MinPres Rutte saying that he has never been tested and that testing doesn’t make any sense when you don’t have complaints.
How about our asymptomatic teachers, nurses, doctors and kids?
"All people are equal, but some people are more equal than others"
39/
How about our asymptomatic teachers, nurses, doctors and kids?
"All people are equal, but some people are more equal than others"
39/
Critical questions should be asked to anyone in control right now. Governments, scientists and management of life sciences companies.
PCR has a huge effect on society at the moment. We deserve independent, transparent research of the reliability based on science.
40/
PCR has a huge effect on society at the moment. We deserve independent, transparent research of the reliability based on science.
40/
Especially, given the huge scandal in Germany where it was found out that politicians paid scientists in order to calculate towards their desired measures. Also not covered significantly by MSM.
@sterrelindhout @antennedowideit
https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article225864597/Interner-E-Mail-Verkehr-Innenministerium-spannte-Wissenschaftler-ein.html
41/
@sterrelindhout @antennedowideit
https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article225864597/Interner-E-Mail-Verkehr-Innenministerium-spannte-Wissenschaftler-ein.html
41/
Labs should also publish their Ct values. In Florida it is now mandatory for labs to publish Ct values:
https://21stcenturywire.com/2020/12/11/florida-becomes-first-us-state-to-mandate-reporting-of-ct-values-for-pcr-tests/
42/
https://21stcenturywire.com/2020/12/11/florida-becomes-first-us-state-to-mandate-reporting-of-ct-values-for-pcr-tests/
42/
Please. I would be happy if you prove my doubts wrong.
However, do this with transparency, objectively and with scientific arguments.
There has been enough fear indoctrination and character assassination.
43/
However, do this with transparency, objectively and with scientific arguments.
There has been enough fear indoctrination and character assassination.
43/
I hope to see a world where:
-Ratio instead of fear is leading
-Scientists are truly independent
-Both sides of the story get a platform
-Experts with a contrary opinion can be heard instead of ridiculed
44/
-Ratio instead of fear is leading
-Scientists are truly independent
-Both sides of the story get a platform
-Experts with a contrary opinion can be heard instead of ridiculed
44/
-Judiciary is independent and not threatened
-Politicians rule with our whole wellbeing in mind instead of with tunnel vision on one virus.
45/
-Politicians rule with our whole wellbeing in mind instead of with tunnel vision on one virus.
45/
Dr. Drosten has to to come up with conclusive evidence in German court to verify that the PCR test is reliable.
Obviously, I will follow this closely.
Let’s see if Mainstream Media will pick this up this time.
https://www.wochenblick.at/heidelberg-umstrittener-prof-drosten-muss-gericht-pcr-test-erklaeren/
46/
Obviously, I will follow this closely.
Let’s see if Mainstream Media will pick this up this time.
https://www.wochenblick.at/heidelberg-umstrittener-prof-drosten-muss-gericht-pcr-test-erklaeren/
46/
I have no interests anymore in any of the mentioned shares.
However, I am heavily invested in my human rights, freedom, freedom of speech, privacy and autonomy.
Views are my own.
47/
However, I am heavily invested in my human rights, freedom, freedom of speech, privacy and autonomy.
Views are my own.
47/
@mvanpoll @mkeulemans @c_drosten
@goddeketal @freddiesayers @unherd @BallouxFrancois
@NovacytInsider @TaylorQuant @PrimerdesignLtd @JornLuka
@goddeketal @freddiesayers @unherd @BallouxFrancois
@NovacytInsider @TaylorQuant @PrimerdesignLtd @JornLuka
@threadreaderapp
unroll
unroll
