PCR-Test Cycle Threshold Issue

Tell me what these experimental injections performed well at?

And max, you still have yet to explain how all of the medical authorities and media darlings failed to understand that a PCR-test cycle threshold of 40 would make the test meaningless. Were they morons for not understanding that?

Of course, they did understand that; they just pretended not to. They certainly understood it enough to know that they needed to turn the cycle threshold of the PCR-test down to a reasonable 28, but only for the vaccinated.

Why did they do that, max?

Apparently I've stumped max. And since no one else has volunteered to explain the reasoning behind the CDC's decision to make such a change, I'll assume that everyone now understands the reason for the change.

But for those who still don't get it, the answer to the question of why the CDC decided to turn the cycle threshold of the PCR-test down to a legitimate 28, but only for the vaccinated, is that they need to create the illusion that the vaccinated are somehow protected from the virus, while the unvaccinated are still testing positive. It's a marketing ploy.

You didn't stump Max. You bored Max.

Sure, max. I guess it wouldn't hurt to humor you by referring to your failure to back up your previous post when asked to as . . . boredom.

More information concerning the experimental injection. This time, from the inventor of the mRNA technology himself:

Dr. Robert Malone invented the mRNA and DNA vaccine core platform technology. He has grave concerns about the lack of transparency of side effects, censoring of discussion and the lack of informed consent that these bring.

Free SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is biologically active — contrary to initial assumptions — and causes severe problems. It is responsible for the most severe effects seen in COVID-19, such as bleeding disorders, blood clots throughout the body and heart problems. These are the same problems we now see in a staggering number of people who have received the COVID-19 “vaccine.”

The spike protein also has reproductive toxicity, and Pfizer’s biodistribution data show it accumulates in women’s ovaries. Data suggests the miscarriage rate among women who get the COVID “vaccine” within the first 20 weeks of pregnancy is 82%.

Israeli data show boys and men between the ages of 16 and 24 who have been vaccinated have 25 times the rate of myocarditis (heart inflammation) than normal.

The COVID-19 injections have emergency use authorization only, which can only be granted if there are no safe and effective remedies available. Such remedies do exist, but have been actively censored and suppressed.

June 11, 2021, the inventor of the mRNA vaccine technology, Dr. Robert Malone, spoke out on the DarkHorse podcast about the potential dangers of COVID-19 gene therapy injections. The podcast was quickly erased from YouTube.

Malone is concerned about government not being transparent about risks, and that people are being coerced into taking these experimental injections, which violates bioethics laws

He believes the risks outweigh the benefits in children, teens and young adults, and that those who have recovered from natural SARS-CoV-2 infection should not get the injection

Five days after his DarkHorse podcast appearance, Malone’s scientific accomplishments and contributions were scrubbed from Wikipedia

As recently as June 14, 2021, Malone’s contributions were extensively included in the historical section on RNA vaccines’ Wikipedia page. June 16, his name was removed and his accomplishments attributed to nameless researchers at the Salk Institute, the University of California, and the University of Wisconsin.

Malone is concerned about government not being transparent about risks, and that people are being coerced into taking these experimental injections, which violates bioethics laws

He believes the risks outweigh the benefits in children, teens and young adults, and that those who have recovered from natural SARS-CoV-2 infection should not get the injection

Five days after his DarkHorse podcast appearance, Malone’s scientific accomplishments and contributions were scrubbed from Wikipedia

As recently as June 14, 2021, Malone’s contributions were extensively included in the historical section on RNA vaccines’ Wikipedia page. June 16, his name was removed and his accomplishments attributed to nameless researchers at the Salk Institute, the University of California, and the University of Wisconsin

Lastly, government and any number of vaccine stakeholders are encouraging companies and schools to make these experimental injections mandatory, which violates the rule of voluntariness. Government and private businesses are also creating massive incentives to participate in this experiment, including million-dollar lotteries and full college scholarships. None of this is ethical or even legal. As noted by Malone in his essay:15

“… as these vaccines are not yet market authorized (licensed), coercion of human subjects to participate in medical experimentation is specifically forbidden. Therefore, public health policies which meet generally accepted criteria for coercion to participate in clinical research are forbidden.

For example, if I were to propose a clinical trial involving children and entice participation by giving out ice cream to those willing to participate, any institutional human subjects safety board (IRB) in the United States would reject that protocol.

If I were to propose a clinical research protocol wherein the population of a geographic region would lose personal liberties unless 70% of the population participated in my study, once again, that protocol would be rejected by any US IRB based on coercion of subject participation. No coercion to participate in the study is allowed.

In human subject clinical research, in most countries of the world this is considered a bright line that cannot be crossed. So, now we are told to waive that requirement without even so much as open public discussion being allowed? In conclusion, I hope that you will join me; stop to take a moment and consider for yourself what is going on. The logic seems clear to me.

1) An unlicensed medical product deployed under emergency use authorization (EUA) remains an experimental product under clinical research development.

2) EUA authorized by national authorities basically grants a short-term right to administer the research product to human subjects without written informed consent.

3) The Geneva Convention, the Helsinki declaration, and the entire structure which supports ethical human subjects research requires that research subjects be fully informed of risks and must consent to participation without coercion.”

Clearly, Malone is preeminently qualified to speak on the topic of COVID gene therapy: Not only is he a highly ethical physician committed to integrity, but he actually invented the very technology and performed the first mRNA vaccine studies. The fact that he is now censored by Big Tech and outright being erased from scientific history is a crime in and of itself, and something that should worry just about everyone.

I saw Malone story on Darkhorse. Made me want to throw up.

This Covid 19 thing stinks more everyday.
I only know 5 people who got the jab and two of them had very bad reactions, one requiring ER treatment. They can stick their jab up their arses.

Yeah, ya got the guy who invented the PCR-test saying it was not meant to be a diagnostic tool; and ya got the medical establishment acknowledging that the inappropriate test was set too high; and ya got the guy who invented the mRNA platform being scrubbed out of existence for warning people about the dangers of the experimental injection; and THEN ya got the people who choose liars and hypocrites over the truth and who refuse to explain the reasoning behind their illogical choice. But I'm not here to judge . . .

From the good people at Moderna:

Enabling Drug Discovery & Development

We built Moderna on the guiding premise that if using mRNA as a medicine works for one disease, it should work for many diseases. And, if this is possible – given the right approach and infrastructure – it could meaningfully improve how medicines are discovered, developed and manufactured.

Our Operating System

Recognizing the broad potential of mRNA science, we set out to create an mRNA technology platform that functions very much like an operating system on a computer. It is designed so that it can plug and play interchangeably with different programs. In our case, the "program” or “app” is our mRNA drug - the unique mRNA sequence that codes for a protein.

We have a dedicated team of several hundred scientists and engineers solely focused on advancing Moderna's platform technology. They are organized around key disciplines and work in an integrated fashion to advance knowledge surrounding mRNA science and solve for challenges that are unique to mRNA drug development. Some of these disciplines include mRNA biology, chemistry, formulation & delivery, bioinformatics and protein engineering.

Our mRNA Medicines – The ‘Software of Life’

When we have a concept for a new mRNA medicine and begin research, fundamental components are already in place.

Generally, the only thing that changes from one potential mRNA medicine to another is the coding region – the actual genetic code that instructs ribosomes to make protein. Utilizing these instruction sets gives our investigational mRNA medicines a software-like quality. We also have the ability to combine different mRNA sequences encoding for different proteins in a single mRNA investigational medicine.

We are leveraging the flexibility afforded by our platform and the fundamental role mRNA plays in protein synthesis to pursue mRNA medicines for a broad spectrum of diseases.


Within a given modality, the base components are generally identical across development candidates - formulation, 5’ region and 3’ region. Only the coding region varies based on the protein/s the potential medicine is directing cells to produce.

Learn how our Research Engine and Early Development Engine are enabling us to fully maximize the promise of mRNA to meaningfully improve how medicines are discovered, developed and manufactured.

Overcoming Key Challenges

Using mRNA to create medicines is a complex undertaking and requires overcoming novel scientific and technical challenges. We need to get the mRNA into the targeted tissue and cells while evading the immune system. If the immune system is triggered, the resultant response may limit protein production and, thus, limit the therapeutic benefit of mRNA medicines. We also need ribosomes to think the mRNA was produced naturally, so they can accurately read the instructions to produce the right protein. And we need to ensure the cells express enough of the protein to have the desired therapeutic effect.

Our multidisciplinary platform teams work together closely to address these scientific and technical challenges. This intensive cross-functional collaboration has enabled us to advance key aspects of our platform and make significant strides to deliver mRNA medicines for patients.

https://www.modernatx.com/mrna-technology/mrna-platform-enabling-drug-discovery-development

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Not once did they mention the word "vaccine." However, I heard them mention mRNA medicines lots of times.

They mention it on their vaccine boxes.

Don't let farmer see that! It might destroy his delusion that there is nothing but chemistry in life. All that talk of software!!

But good article. There is nothing wrong with using the software via mRNA approach, IF you understand the operating system well enough to see all the consequences. I don't believe they are there yet. Science is just at the stage of peeking and poking at an operating system written by someone else way beyond their pay grade.

Well yeah, how are they going to get people to take an experimental injection if they don't tell them it's a vaccine. And how else can they release themselves from liability without calling their experimental injection a vaccine; it's just good business practice.

Of course, these companies are notorious for trying to bypass the law to get their products to market. They get busted lots of times and they pay lots and lots of fines. But you go ahead and believe whatever they tell you. I'm sure they have your best interest at heart.

I'm not here to play test subject to a bunch of bored science people whose only fulfillment left them in life is to explore and pollute the only frontier left to them--the human population.

They don't impress me at all.

So, experimental injections cannot be vaccines?

At some point along its development, the polio vaccine was experimental.

In order for them to understand your point, they would have to understand what 'vaccine' traditionally means.
They don't, so it's like arguing with monkeys.
And they never see that government/science will knowingly lie to the public if they think it's for a good reason. Thus, call it 'Vaccine' on the label.

There will always be those with their heads shoved so thoroughly up their asses that they will deny science for their favored conspiracy theories of the day.

Snapish!

I know. Even the manufacturer didn't call it a vaccine until it was profitable to do so . . . like to free themselves from liability when their product causes harm.

No, an experimental injection that is not a vaccine cannot be a vaccine. But if you really believe that this experimental injection confers immunity to the recipient, you should contact the manufacturer and tell them about this because they've never said that.

Yet another attempt to compare an actual vaccine to the new experimental injections. That's old hat . . .