reSee.it - Related Video Feed

This video discusses the PCR test used for COVID-19 and raises concerns about its accuracy and potential misuse. It explains that the test amplifies a small amount of DNA to detect the virus, but if amplified too much, it can result in false positives. The inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, stated that it was not meant for diagnosing viruses. The video suggests that the high cycle thresholds used in testing lead to inflated case numbers and a false sense of a pandemic. It also mentions the potential dangers of the test, such as the use of sterilizing solutions and the possibility of containing the vaccine. The video encourages critical thinking and research to understand the true nature of the situation.

This speaker claims that SARS-CoV-2 has never been isolated or purified, and the PCR test is not reliable for detecting infectious virus. They argue that autopsies are not being conducted to hide the truth about COVID-19. The speaker questions the validity of the vaccine and criticizes the government's handling of the pandemic, including the use of the PCR test. They mention a document sent to the Chief Constable regarding these issues.

In the video, the speaker discusses the significant reduction in confirmed influenza cases in the United States and Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic. They mention that in the US, there was a 99.995% reduction in cases, while in Canada, the numbers dropped from 55,379 to 69. The speaker suggests that this may be due to a renaming of cases or the high cycle thresholds used in PCR testing. They also mention discrepancies in reporting and vaccination status data in Newfoundland and Labrador. The speaker notes that all 11 deaths reported in a specific period were fully vaccinated individuals, and they personally know unvaccinated individuals over the age of 70.

The speaker criticizes the idea that the virus has the same sequence in different countries, calling it absurd. They suggest that those who understand this concept are happy to go along with it because it prevents others from figuring things out. The speaker mentions Gerrit van den Bosch as someone who could explain the randomness of the virus. They highlight that only a small fraction of the virus molecules make it to the end, with each having the same error rate. The speaker encourages using imagination to understand this biology and suggests that programmers could create a program to simulate the virus swarm. They believe that this knowledge could be taught if desired.

The speakers discuss the issue of not isolating the virus. They explain that without isolating the virus, it is impossible to determine its composition or its effects. They mention that there is no record of the virus being isolated anywhere in the world by anyone, despite institutions claiming to have searched for such records. They emphasize that this lack of isolation is a significant concern.

This video discusses the PCR test used to diagnose COVID-19 and raises concerns about its accuracy and potential misuse. The test amplifies a small amount of DNA to detect the virus, but when run for too many cycles, it can produce false positives. The inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, stated that it was not meant for diagnostic purposes. The CDC itself acknowledges the limitations of the PCR test and will be changing its method in 2022. The video also explores claims about the test containing sterilizing solutions, storing DNA, and even acting as a vaccine. It urges viewers to question the information presented and seek out alternative sources.

In this video, the speaker emphasizes the importance of pursuing both hypotheses regarding the origins of the virus. They express skepticism about the virus originating from a bat and becoming highly infectious to humans. The speaker believes that the exclusion from certain calls was due to their differing viewpoint. They discuss how a group of scientists initially found the genetic sequence inconsistent with evolutionary theory but later drafted a paper arguing the opposite, allegedly prompted by Dr. Fauci. The speaker criticizes the approach taken in February 2020, stating that it goes against the principles of science. They suggest that the narrative of the virus originating from a wet market was predetermined and aimed to suppress discussion about a lab leak. The speaker also acknowledges that gain-of-function research was funded by various organizations, including NIH, State Department, USAID, and DoD.

Speaker 0 argues that the test cannot distinguish live from dead matter, only analyzes fragments and is set up to guarantee false positives, which the speaker claims was used to create case numbers for declaring a public health emergency of international concern and to enable untested drugs or vaccines to be used on people. Speaker 1 adds that the biggest lie may be that true viral isolates are unavailable, noting that the claimed genome of SARS-CoV-2 exists only in silico as a computer-programmed genome. The speaker says fear is created to control people, describing “fake mythical flying unicorns” that make us sick and asserting that disease is constructed rather than evidenced by visible agents. They claim that there is no evidence of transmission or isolations supporting the idea of a pathogen causing disease in the usual sense. The speaker references Andrew Kaufman, Doctor Cowan, Stephen Lunk, and others to support the claim that, after a year of pandemic conditions, there is no virus proven through traditional means, including in the 1918 influenza pandemic. They state that volunteers were exposed to sputum from infected individuals, or to the sputum directly, without becoming ill; some experiments involved injecting processed material, which also did not cause illness. They note that horses did not consistently transmit illness when exposed to similar materials, and conclude that influenza does not originate from a Latin term for a virus but means “influence,” suggesting historical transmission evidence is weak. The speakers discuss that we do not have approved evidence of transmission, a virus, a test, or autopsies; what exists is a syndrome of symptoms—flu-like symptoms without pathognomonic signs. They propose several alternative causes for COVID-19–like illness, including transmissibility that appears real but isn’t, radiation effects, and other non-disease explanations. Speaker 1 references Dr. Cowan’s book Contagion to illustrate how radiation exposure in mines could mimic disease transmission, where illness is not truly infectious. They argue that non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) and exposure to graphene oxide toxicity (claimed to be present in vaccines and referred to as viral-based genetic therapies by the FDA) could produce COVID-like symptoms. They also acknowledge an artificially created spike protein in a lab as a known factor. However, they reiterate that there is no evidence for the mythical SARS-CoV-2 virus as a causative agent. In summary, the dialogue challenges the existence of proven SARS-CoV-2 isolates, questions the validity of tests and transmission evidence, and proposes alternative explanations for the illness, including EMF toxicity, graphene oxide toxicity, and lab-made spike proteins, while highlighting a lack of definitive proof for traditional viral causation.

Dr. Cardcaine, an epidemiologist from the University of Michigan, is identified as the person who broke the story in February about a bird flu outbreak linked to the USDA research lab. He states that mainstream media are not reporting on this development. He also asserts that Peter Hotez will not tell the public about this information. According to the speaker, the current strain of bird flu in this outbreak was created in a lab through serial passage conducted in a U.S. government laboratory. The claim specifies that this lab-driven process enabled the virus to jump from traditional chickens to migratory waterfowl. From there, the outbreak purportedly spread to cows, marking a transition from poultry to other species in the ecosystem. The narrative presented emphasizes that the origin and progression of the outbreak are laboratory-generated, rather than arising solely from natural spillover events. The speaker highlights that the virus was manipulated via serial passage in a government lab, a technique used to adapt pathogens to new hosts or improve transmissibility. The sequence described claims a progression: initial adaptation in poultry, transmission to migratory waterfowl, and subsequent appearance in cattle. The speaker underscores two supplementary points: first, that major media outlets have not reported on this angle of the outbreak; second, that a well-known public figure in the field, Peter Hotez, is portrayed as someone who would supposedly not disclose this information. The overall message portrays a narrative of concealment and laboratory involvement in the emergence and spread of the bird flu across species, culminating in its presence in cows. In summary, the speaker attributes the outbreak to deliberate laboratory manipulation via serial passage in a U.S. government facility, tracing a path from chickens to migratory waterfowl and then to cows, while accusing mainstream media of omission and suggesting that Peter Hotez would not disclose these details.

Birds don't get flu. Birds do not get influenza. Birds can get sick, but they haven't got flu, and it's not contagious. So, the PCR test is a measure of nothing. It's fraud. So and they could make the birds sick in any number of ways just by treating them badly. If they overcrowd them, that will make them sick. If they stress them, that will make them sick. And if they then come in and test them, they can claim bird flu in the flock, then they can kill all the birds, and then they can say, oh, look. Bird flu is going around. It doesn't even exist because like I told you, birds don't get colds. Birds don't sneeze. Have you ever seen a bird coughing? And I wouldn't think monkeys get pox either. Really. They're hairy.

The existence of the virus is questioned due to the initial PCR test methodology being based on a computer model virus, not a purified isolate from real patients. China did not have a pure isolate, so they used elements of a genetic code to create a computer model sequence. This sequence became the basis for the PCR test. The WHO document states that the diagnosis of SARS CoV-2 should not rely on isolating the virus. The virus has never been purified, and the disease is based on generic symptoms that could be anything.

The speaker discusses the lack of necessary controls in scientific research on SARS-CoV-2. They mention that very few examples of implemented controls exist, but the results are alarming. Scientists from Switzerland were able to extract the whole genome of SARS-CoV-2 without the presence of the virus itself. Similarly, scientists from China obtained numerous SARS-CoV-2 sequences without any virus in cell cultures. The speaker suggests contacting the Chinese scientists for more information. They also mention that using raw reads, it is possible to assemble other viruses like measles and HIV. The speaker finds these findings shocking and believes it is important to discuss the implications with doctors, scientists, and anyone interested in the topic.

It seems that bird flu, a gain-of-function strain, is causing concern. The strain possibly originated from the USDA Poultry Research Lab in Georgia. Former CDC director Redfield mentioned that manipulating the virus could make it transmissible to humans. Interestingly, the director of the lab has ties to the Gates Foundation. This raises questions about the origins and implications of the outbreak.

The speaker suggests that there is a global crime being committed by those in power who have exaggerated the threat of a new respiratory virus. They argue that there is no real health threat and that the only moving part in this situation is the PCR test. The speaker questions the existence of respiratory viruses and believes that people still get ill with similar symptoms as before, but the cause is unknown. They conclude that these illnesses are not caused by respiratory viruses.

The speaker discusses the disappearance of the flu during the COVID-19 pandemic and questions why it was not as prevalent as usual. They explore various explanations, including the idea that COVID-19 was more contagious and therefore outcompeted the flu. They also mention studies suggesting that social distancing and mask-wearing measures effectively eradicated the flu. The speaker raises concerns about the financial incentives hospitals received for COVID-19 cases and suggests that misdiagnosing flu cases as COVID-19 may have occurred. They conclude that corruption and control may have played a role in the handling of the pandemic. The speaker encourages viewers to join their community for more information and understanding.

The speaker discusses the disappearance of the flu during the COVID-19 pandemic and questions why it was not reported in statistics. They explore various explanations, including the idea that COVID-19 was more contagious and therefore outcompeted the flu. They also mention a study from Harvard suggesting that social distancing and mask-wearing measures effectively eradicated the flu. The speaker raises concerns about the inconsistency in the effectiveness of these measures against COVID-19. They also mention financial incentives for hospitals to diagnose COVID-19 cases, which may have led to misdiagnosis or overreporting. The speaker concludes that corruption and control may be behind these inconsistencies.

This video discusses the PCR test used to diagnose COVID-19 and raises concerns about its accuracy and potential misuse. The test amplifies a small amount of DNA to detect the virus, but if it is amplified too much, it can result in false positives. The inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, stated that it was not meant for diagnostic purposes. The video also questions the use of the PCR test for diagnosing COVID-19 when the CDC itself states that it should not be used for this purpose. Additionally, there are claims that the PCR test contains sterilizing solutions and may even contain the vaccine. The video encourages critical thinking and further research.

The speaker discusses the issue of cycle thresholds in PCR testing. They explain that the original protocol used a cycle threshold of 45, which amplifies the results by 10. This means that even unlikely findings, such as particles from Mars, could be detected. The speaker suggests that by using a high cycle threshold, it is possible to create a pandemic by testing healthy individuals and spreading the myth of asymptomatic spread. This is how cases are created, according to the speaker.

The speaker, a former Pfizer employee, claims that the information and safety measures provided by governments regarding the virus are false. They argue that PCR testing is unreliable and that the public should disregard case rates and announcements. They warn of a hidden agenda and urge people to pay attention and take action. The video includes various news clips reporting on COVID-19 cases and deaths. The speaker questions the accuracy of COVID-19 death counts and compares the virus to the flu. They also discuss the lack of flu cases during the pandemic and suggest that flu cases were mislabeled as COVID-19. The speaker criticizes the PCR test and accuses governments of manipulating the results to drive their agenda. They highlight the potential dangers of the vaccines and express skepticism towards the medical establishment. The video concludes with a call to resist fear and manipulation and to seek the truth.

This video discusses the PCR test used to diagnose COVID-19 and raises concerns about its accuracy and potential misuse. It explains that the test amplifies DNA to detect the virus, but when amplified too much, it can result in false positives. The inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, stated that it was not designed for diagnostic purposes. The video also questions the use of the PCR test for diagnosing COVID-19 when the CDC itself states that it should not be used for this purpose. It suggests that the high cycle thresholds used in testing contribute to false positives and that the test may contain harmful substances. The video encourages critical thinking and research to uncover the truth.

The speakers discuss the misuse of PCR in estimating viral RNA. They explain that PCR can detect almost anything in the body, making it easy to find even rare viruses like HIV. However, they argue that testing for HIV specifically is unnecessary because individuals with HIV are likely to have other viruses as well. They emphasize that PCR is a quantitative tool that provides measurable information, but it does not determine sickness or the potential harm of a virus. The speakers also mention that PCR cannot differentiate between virus particles and active live viruses. Overall, they highlight the limitations and misinterpretations of PCR testing.

The speaker discusses the unethical actions of the CDC in patenting the SARS coronavirus, the bioterrorism threat of the RT PCR test, and the gain of function research on coronaviruses. They highlight the financial motives behind the push for a universal vaccine template and call for an end to gain of function research and corporate influence in science. The speaker emphasizes the need for moral oversight and independent review boards in scientific research.

This is a transcript discussing the lack of isolation of SARS-CoV-2, the inefficacy of PCR tests, and the questionable actions surrounding COVID-19. The speaker questions the existence of the virus, criticizes the use of PCR tests, and highlights the lack of autopsies. They also mention the government's spending on tests that do not accurately detect the virus. The speaker references documents sent to authorities and statements made by officials regarding the PCR test's accuracy.

The speaker discusses a theory about the funding of the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origins of the coronavirus. They mention a researcher named Ralph Barrick and his chimeric coronavirus research. They also talk about the US Center for Disease Control filing a patent on the coronavirus and its detection. The speaker suggests that the CDC had control over who could study the virus and profit from it. They imply that there may have been illegal actions involved in the manipulation of the coronavirus for monetary gain.

The speaker discusses a theory about the funding of the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origins of the coronavirus. They mention a researcher named Ralph Barrick and his chimeric coronavirus research. They also talk about the US Center for Disease Control filing a patent on the coronavirus and its detection. The speaker suggests that the CDC had control over who could study the virus and profit from it. They imply that there may have been illegal actions involved in the manipulation and patenting of the coronavirus.