This article may trigger strong emotions. To clarify, COVID-19 as an infection does pose serious health risks to vulnerable people. That being said, I believe we must still discuss the issues affecting our nation and communities in an open and transparent manner.
Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) testing is the primary tool used by governments to identify COVID-19 outbreaks. When restrictions were first mooted in 2020, they were in place to slow the spread as to not overwhelm hospital emergency departments.
We now see state-wide restrictions and lockdowns as a result of low case numbers. At the time of printing, there is one person in ICU in Australia with COVID-19 and a total of 54 in hospital, from a nation of 25,360,000 people.
Yes, COVID-19 is a risk, but so are lockdowns.
The trigger for these lockdowns is the numbers of positive PCR tests. What if a PCR test didn’t accurately reflect live virus but instead Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) of dead virus?
PCR testing is a forensic test, where minute samples of material are multiplied through cycles, often used in DNA testing.
The test identifies the presence of COVID-19 RNA and that varies from ‘infectious’.
A recent report in the Infectious Disease Society of America1 cited:
- This high sensitivity for viral RNA can be helpful for initial diagnosis. However, reporting as a binary positive or negative result removes useful information that could inform clinical decision making.
- A positive RT-qPCR result may not necessarily mean the person is still infectious, or that he or she still has any meaningful disease. First, the RNA could be from non-viable or killed virus. Live virus is often isolable only during the first week of symptoms but not after day eight, even with positive RT-qPCR tests.
Others are also questioning the approach to testing. Dr Michael Mina is an Epidemiologist, Immunologist, Physician at the Harvard Public Health/Medical School.
Michael explains, “The molecular tools we use like PCR for COVID-19 tests detect the virus genome. Like detecting DNA in a piece of hair, detecting virus RNA tells little about whether the virus is still active.
“When the virus is growing and someone is transmitting virus, it grows to billions of viruses. So, it’s easy to detect when virus load is high using antigen tests (look for the virus proteins themselves) or PCR (look for the RNA).
“The PCR test can continue picking up that leftover RNA the whole time it is there – for weeks or months AFTER the viral infection has been essentially cleared.
“So, ultimately, the majority of time spent in the PCR positive state is after infection, not transmissible.”
According to a recent Canadian investigation2, “An individual who tests positive with cycle count of 35–40 is very likely not contagious and would not require self-isolation, because their viral load would be extremely low.”
The Canadian investigation does highlight the quandary with the Australian approach. An ABC article3 titled, ‘There’s a lot of misinformation around about COVID-19 PCR tests. We asked an expert to clear it up’ states ‘According to [Australian] Dr [Julian] Druce, PCR tests for COVID-19 are analysed through “about 40 to 45 heat and cooling cycles”, with most tests in Australia capped at 40 cycles.’
Is questioning PCR [testing] “misinformation?” If you are not allowed to question and analyse the facts, how far would our society truly have developed from the stone age to now?
Ivermectin was also listed as fake news and misinformation and yet has saved countless lives around the world, aiding as a preventative and also as treatment of COVID-19.
We will have a story next week about the facts on Ivermectin. The denial of this life-saving, safe treatment amounts to what I consider widespread criminal negligence causing huge loss of human life.
If you entrust your prosperity [solely] to politicians, maybe you need a PCR test. You might be ill.
1 https://bit.ly/3ybVtiD
2 https://bit.ly/3hhYgzO
3 https://ab.co/3w8m7HD
This article appeared in The Koondrook and Barham Bridge Newspaper, 1 July 2021.
