The Truth Pill you all should hear an share about Covid

I also suggest this but keep in mind it was done at the advent of COVID.

A quick note about videos of these types. Download them when you have the chance because they tend to get censored everywhere. I like to snag stuff off YouTube before it gets banned. I was able to get the Project Veritas video about CNN and AOC before they pulled it.

I’m gonna give a big post here to summarize how I feel about some of the topics mentioned, and try to explain what I know simply and as succinctly as possible. As that guy’s junior in the field that cannot be whatsoever related to what he’s talking about politically (I never heard of the man and I doubt our political ideologies align), it may be of some use to people to see what I confirm or want to somewhat address. Nevertheless, this will be a REALLY BIG post.

 

I’ll end it with a little explanation of the PCR test to explain why it’s starting to be controversial (and why the scurrieh delta variant ‘cannot be detected’ ohno). Scroll to the bottom if you just want to learn a quick course on PCR and why it potentially sucked as the most widespread method of detecting Corona in this pandemic.

 

—————————————————-

 

*Asymptomatic Transmission* : Way less of an issue than folks made it ‘look like’ it’d be early on. It’s incredibly hard for an airborne virus to spread if anyone who has it doesn’t actually do anything to, well, get it airborne. Low-symptom cases that believe they have a cold or a flu *might* be health risks to others, nearly-asymptomatic cases pretty much aren’t. Early stages where the sickness is still in ‘incubation’ phase fall between those two cases generally.

 

*Lockdown&Lockdown 2, Electric Boogaloo* : Interestingly even if we assume lockdowns are helping with limiting the spread of the virus (which, if they were, they have been misused as clearly the way they were applied has not worked), they do risk increasing the severity of infection once you do catch the virus (due to potential vitamin D deficiencies and the slow weakening of an ‘isolated’ immune system that doesn’t have to fight off potential mini-infections from the environment frequently).

 

————————————————–

*Vaccine things* : Normal process to get a vaccine onto the market takes 10-15 years. Sometimes it’s shorter, but that’s the general length of it. All of the vaccines currently on the market have supposedly been pumped out there in less than a year, which doesn’t line up with other claims about them. All of these vaccines are, to some extent, rushed, imperfect products. It is sometimes fine to pursue such a product anyway. I am completely convinced some of the vaccines that are being worked on are produced by competent people who genuinely mean well while also wanting to earn money – generally, I’d bet those vaccines will be the ones released a little later into the game, though.

 

• AstraZeneca blood clotting cases have so far been tied to two major additional conditions : They appeared primarily in women taking contraception and in patients with Alzheimer’s disease, likely reacting with some types of medicine used for that disease. In the first case, they’d never have the time or the idea in this short a time to test this, in the second case, no one would test it anyway, cause almost all patients with Alzheimer’s onset are in the group which will be told to vaccinate anyway (they didn’t care).

 

The thing I am strictly against in this vaccination process, and the most worried about, is Pfizer and Moderna’s attempt to use this pandemic to suddenly burst out with mRNA-tech based products. Long story short :

• Moderna’s been sitting on a 2 billion investor dollars’ worth of timebomb in terms of money given to them for mRNA research. This research was stretched out for 10 years. Out of quite a number of projects that included mRNA-based drugs and vaccines, under normal circumstances and with normal legal limitations, none of what they attempted to produce has been admitted to the market as safe – before the pandemic, that is.
• The dosage of these mRNA is poorly understood (likely why the ‘double injection’ thing is happening, primarily, in the first place) and there’s great worry about auto-immunological related problems potentially caused by them down the line.
• Pfizer’s and Moderna’s mRNA vaccines are the FIRST products in this technology admitted to the market, and only under these lowered conventions, ever, in history. I am also lead to believe this vaccine is the first bigger product Moderna released at all, and it was given an extra 1 billion dollars from the US government to produce it on top of the investor dollars.

Combined with the case of the Baltimore facility that was meant to start producing AstraZeneca and J&J vaccines doing something that could easily be seen as sabotage by mixing the ingredients wrong, and combined with the fact AstraZeneca and other vector-based vaccines are under constant media scrutiny but you had to research cases of death by Pfizer vaccine on your own if you wanted to know the numbers, this almost feels like an unfair push for a product that can easily cause consequences down the line.

If I’m vaccinating, and I likely will eventually, I will do my utmost to not get vaccinated with one of those. Heck, I possibly would’ve taken A-Z or J&J shot already if my stupid government allowed the citizens the right to choose which one they want, just so people get off my damn neck. There’s a reason people who are extremely pro-vaccination overall (like me) and might’ve even, under different circumstances, be making money off of trying to make, or producing, a Covid vaccine or another vaccine’s production (also like me) are also amongst folks who are at least a little apprehensive about the vaccines or a subtype of them offered.

 

 

 

————————————————–

*Pharmaceutical research and policies/honesty* : Nothing to add here compared to what the gentleman in the video has spoken about. Nowadays you just chase popular stuff and work on stuff you are suggested to work on.

 

*Immunity ‘flavors’* : He’s right, you know. You’ll rarely hear it but antibody levels are not gonna be the be-all-end-all of immunity here, nor even the major indicator. Hell, I know about that and I forgot to explain it when a relative asked me about antibody levels on the phone. Presence of antibody levels in the blood after meeting an infection does indicate your organism might’ve fought off an infection recently. Not having constantly high level of those antibodies does not necessarily mean your immunity levels are falling off. High antibody counts means it’s likely small infections won’t develop and that the virus will take longer to actually manifest symptoms than low antibody levels; They (the ones measurable in your bloodstream, at least) don’t actually help fight off the virus once you are infected to that significant of a degree – they can help stop the initial infection and somewhat mitigate the spread of the virus if it has a short ‘inactive’ cycle, but that’s it, the rest is handled by other portions of your immune system.

 

 

——————————

*Therapeutic drugs / Pharmacological treatment* : I mentioned this earlier in another topic. The amount of registered, existing drugs across the world that are deemed to have effects or are ‘likely to have some effect’ against Covid number in the *hundreds* (I don’t want to lie, but I believe the exact number might’ve been just over 900), yet in many countries, scientists are having trouble getting their research into a promising drug’s effect on curing the sickness approved of, let alone funded. This means that everything has been bet on a vaccine rather than researching a fully effective actual treatment plan : If someone is being treated, it’s either with drugs that are best guess by a doctor, with things that are frequently used purely for certain widespread symptoms like anti-inflammatory or anti-fever substances, or with plasma transfers from people who have been through the coronavirus (which will primarily share antibodies).

 

 

 

 

————————————————

*Virus variants* : He’s only wrong in two potential cases. One is for incredibly specific and precise sciences like if the difference is in the primer sequence for your PCR process, which is how the supposed ‘delta variant’ is escaping detection via PCR the usually used methods, including less precise PCR methods, or incredibly specific antigen-testing methods (i.e. one that literally check only for one particular protein or protein domain).

• Other methods still exist to tell you it’s Covid, they just won’t specifically tell you it’s Delta variant either. We’ve discussed it in another topic, but the only real way they can be getting Delta ‘numbers’ is approximating them through models or by getting numbers for all new Covid cases and calling ones that couldn’t be detected via a few particular methods, or even *all that were detected with methods other than the ones confirmed to not be useful against Delta*, as Delta variant cases. Vaccination and immunology is nowhere near this level of specific (as he explained by pointing out Sars patients have a level heightened immunity against Covid-19 too.

 

The other ‘he may be wrong’ case is if the virus was artificially created to have a higher than normal level of mutation, which can be done usually by impairing it’s self-repairing systems, or (very unlikely) has somehow naturally attained this trait (or if any of the new variants is artificially enhanced). The optimistic side is that would lead to a lot of ‘variants’ that are actually way less dangerous than the base Covid-19 itself. The bad side is that indeed even a good vaccine will *always work partially* because the differentiation of the virus is too fast to really keep up with the specific new variants, but it still will, for the most thorough sense of the word, work. In this case… Why bother getting more than one inoculation, or even why bother getting a jab until a genuine vaccine has passed through the same process every other vaccine in existence ever has passed, which normally takes 10-15 years, but let’s say 5-7 here. In fact, at this point you should just be pressing for a pharmacological treatment over a vaccine.

Funnily enough, under normal circumstances, the excess number of vaccinated patients that actually suffer prolonged and somewhat more intense symptoms would point to artificial origin (or the vaccine sucking, but hey, they had 1/10th of the normal time).

 

————————————————

*Delta variant detection* : Most methods that detect coronavirus won’t tell you you have the Delta variant, and only very specific method can differentiate it (it’s pretty much only genome sequencing or PCRing and isothermal amplifying the F out of it to learn which primers worked and which didn’t, which is more trouble and time consuming than it’s worth).

Most commercially available tests do one of a few things :

• Do a quick PCR test of a well known sequence,
• apply isothermal amplification of a well-known sequence (many work same as PCR but they use chemical agents instead of temperature to denaturate DNA; the primers used are often different, however, which is why isothermal amplification test may lead to different results than PCR tests),
• do an antigen test for a well known part of the capsid (protein shell of the virus),
• do an antigen test for a protein domain of an enzyme or other protein associated with the viral cycle, or a secondary metabolite associated with infection,
• do a test for presence of antibodies which generally suggests you’ve been exposed to the virus or a similar virus .

If delta variant’s lack of detection is a problem, this is because it has a mutation that (likely only one or some of those is true : I’ve heard delta variant eludes specifically commercially available PCR tests, but conflicting information is present on the net) :

1. Throws off the PCR tests commonly used by having a similar sequence to the primer-binding sequence elsewhere in its code
2. Throws off antigen tests by having a mutated protein sequence for what they’re testing. This generally implies that the antigen test is looking for only a very specific protein or protein domain that is now mutated or inaccessible.
3. Throws off PCR tests commonly used by having an irregular sequence where the mass-produced primers would normally connect

However, it Will *not* throw off all antigen-based tests unless they’re all searching for the exact same antigen (usually protein or protein domain), which would be odd but not unheard of for commercial usage. It will also :

•  *not* throw off tests based on antibody presence. (But they have their own flaws).
• Will *only* potentially mess up the antibody portion of the immunization (and generally simply because it was a bad vaccine in the first place) because the capsid’s particular antigen is no longer recognized by the antibodies (but the virus infection will still be recognized by other portions of the immune system). The T-cell based immunity etc. is not affected to any great degree by this change, and I will admit it sounds extremely unlikely to me as-is.

 

—————————————–

Top-up vaccines/booster shots : They wanna earn more money, it’s that simple. Yes, they’re either pointless, nearly pointless, admission of an ineffective/bad/incomplete vaccine, or confirmation the virus is being tampered with as we speak or has been tampered with in the past to continue earning money off of it.

Basically unless Delta variant is artificially made or Covid itself is uncharacteristically likely to have a high degree of mutation which would normally also suggest it may be artificially made, there’s absolutely no justification for ‘booster shots’, and even if either of those cases is true, that justification is minimal as a competent vaccine would still retain a huge degree of effectiveness (to not even mention immunity gained by going through the illness).

 

Sars vs Covid : They are related. It’s a minor support of the lab-grown Covid-19 theory that Sars is more dangerous, cause regular zoonotic viruses often are. It’s also supporting that theory that it was nowhere near as infectious in humans.

 

• Note I personally have no idea whether or not to support the lab-made theory. It came out of China, and *everything goes* there.

 

Vaccine passport : He’s being very pessimistic about it, but he’s not wrong anywhere, no, this possibility exists.

 

 

————————-

 

PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) crash course (And why it sucks as a widespread diagnosis method)

PCR and most ‘Isothermal amplification’ methods, which are related methods, operate on a very simple basis : Sever the DNA double helix into two individual strands via denaturation, usually thermal, and then use an isolated polymerase enzyme at its optimal temperature, along with a set of primers that will specifically connect to these denaturated individual chains’ specific small sequences, to spam-produce that DNA until it’s easily detected, often multiplying existing DNA hundreds of thousands, millions, or billions of times.

 

This is done in cycles :

1. Introduce denaturating agent which is almost always high temperature (Let’s call it temperature A)
2. Lower the temperature to one in which the primers will connect to the desired sequence but there’s no time or circumstances for the full chain to even attempt to re-establish a double helix (temperature B). Know that most PCR descriptions will not give a very specific temperature, only a range, and it is quite likely many diagnosis spots were given a ‘range’, but it is fairly important for this temperature to be accurate so that the ‘primer’ connects to a specific sequence. Too low and you risk the process being ruined by an nonspecific binding of the primer or the DNA attempting to reconnect with its sister chain, too high, and your primer doesn’t bind. Because the upper temperatures are what wrecks the entire process, the medical services at diagnostic spots were likely told to prefer lower temperatures, in which the binding is both faster and *less specific*, thus resulting in more *false positives*.
3. Increase the temperature to optimal temperature for your polymerase (the enzyme that replicates the DNA so you get enough of it for detection). Let’s call it temperature C. In this temperature the new strands form as a result of the polymerase’s activity, and it is chosen as optimal for this polymerase, as in, the one in which it produces more DNA at the fastest pace.

Rinse, repeat, many times, until you have a whole lot of DNA.

 

The temperatures go, in order of how high they are

Temp A > Temp C > Temp B

Temp A is high and well known.

Temp C is specific to the enzyme, otherwise results may be imperfect. It is usually well known, otherwise you wouldn’t be using that enzyme.

Temp B is not *dreadfully* specific under normal circumstances, but *has to be for it to be a good and precise diagnostic method*.

 

Where problems arise :

• Outside of their regular biological ‘in vivo’ conditions, polymerases often have a higher ‘error rate’ than they normally would (and some polymerases are used exactly for a heightened error rate). This means the replicated DNA strains used for further replication may have mistakes in their sequence that further amplify the likelihood of issues happening if mistakes are made later down the line. If anyone sane prepared those tests, they’ll be using polymerase enzymes known for low error rates in vitro.
• If your ‘C’ temperature is nonspecific, the speed at which more DNA is made is lowered, and thus you may be left with a false negative or inconsistent test results. This is the least likely temperature error.
• If your B temperature is nonspecific and too high, you risk a false negative or inconclusive result.
• If your B temperature is nonspecific and too low, you risk many mistakes, but primarily a false *positive*. The primer sequence will connect to the wrong section of a chain, nonspecifically, or to any compatible sequence that is ‘kind of like the sequence it was meant to connect to’. This results in DNA being amplified when it wasn’t meant to, and a few rounds of such mistake can lead to either a false positive or an inconclusive result.
• Various retroviruses related to Covid may have a sequence in their genome that is similar enough to the primer-compatible sequence to cause a false positive or inconclusive result if you have (or even had in the past) another retrovirus-based sickness. This is one of the most likely causes of ‘inconclusive result’ with a PCR test.
• The ‘primer’ sequences can be mutated, as in, a virus can either have an identical/similar sequence lower than the line, or it can have a variant of the primer-compatible sequence that is no longer fully compatible with the primer. This is the most likely cause for a false negative on a PCR test. Ironically, the possibility of a false negative *increases* here if the people diagnosing you know what they’re doing and are doing their job well. In the latter case (‘near-identical sequence down the line’) possibility of false positive or inconsistent result increases no matter what.
• If ‘Delta variant’ causes your PCR test to fail this is likely because of this final case.

 

Why PCR test was chosen : It is simple and easy to carry out. It is cheap. It does not require a big lab. It can be easily mass-produced earning biotech companies money. It doesn’t require thorough knowledge of the genome of the virus, only the specific sequences.

Potential malicious reason : For a run off the mill person doing rapid diagnosis with roundabout instructions, it is much more likely to produce a false positive or inconsistent result than a false negative.

 

 

Why is “Delta variant” spoken of as so bad :

– If ‘Delta variant’ is the widest spread variant, a lot of companies mass producing tests that it avoids will suffer a hit to their earnings. It also forces them to come up with new, potentially more complex, tests for public use.

– If ‘Delta variant’ makes tests fail, it sounds as ‘significantly different enough’ to both encourage more people to vaccinate and boost the popularity of ‘Booster shots’ later. Delta variant panic effective boosts the future earnings of vaccines.

 

Delta variant vs vaccination (or immunity based on going through a different variant) :

• If Delta Variant fails to be detected by a PCR test this is as a result of a mutation within the primer-compatible section. This has no bearing on the effectiveness of the vaccine.
• if Delta Variant fails to be detected by an antigen test, it is likely because that antigen test detects either a simple capsid protein or a post-infection protein *domain* on one of the enzymes ‘servicing’ the virus’ cycle that is normally easily accessible and thus a good spot for conducting such tests, one of the proteins binding the additional DNA put in your test by the virus, or a secondary metabolite associated with infected cells.
• If your antigen targets for your vaccine is a capsid protein that your virus can easily mutate and still do completely fine without or a protein domain chosen simply because of how quick and easy it is to detect, your vaccine sucked from the start.
• If we assume the vaccines are even semi-competently made there’s nearly no way for the delta variant or any other natural variant of a natural virus, if that’s what Covid-19 is, to tremendously affect vaccine effectiveness on a large scale (it’s more likely for the virus’ mutations to render the virus ineffective). If Covid 19 or its Delta variant is not natural, or the diversification of Covid variants is caused by tampering, we would be working with ‘Almost completely applicable but not fully specific’ vaccines from the start anyway. Delta variant does *not* justify booster shots, in my opinion.