Those who controlled Covid tests controlled the world

An article at another Substack prompts look at oddities of the PCR and antibody tests, including the very interesting and largely ignored findings on the USS Roosevelt.

Very few people even wonder about WHEN virus spread actually began.

Substacker Jonathan Engler posted an article yesterday (“New York - It was widespread well before anyone noticed”) that’s generating a good bit of attention. I’m very interested in the article because parts of Jonathan’s thesis seem to jibe with my “early spread” hypothesis (but other parts perhaps do not).

This brings me back to a component of my theory that’s left me frustrated  - namely, there might be no way to prove or “confirm” early spread. According to the many who scoff at my theory, every avenue of inquiry I go down is moot or irrelevant. For example …

PCR tests don’t apply because

no American got an early PCR test …

I can’t use positive PCR tests to “confirm” early Covid cases … because virtually nobody in America got a PCR test until after March 15, 2020.

As I’ve established in my research, CDC officials created PCR testing protocols in mid-January 2020. These testing guidelines stipulated that only people who had recently returned from China (or other nations with “confirmed” cases) could be tested with a PCR test.

In practice, this means 330 million Americans who might have had Covid in January or February 2020 would not and could not get a PCR test.

In my opinion, a key question that’s never been satisfactorily answered is why it took so long to start testing large swaths of the U.S. population via a PCR test.

I also note the official pandemic seems to have commenced only AFTER wide-spread testing began, a point I find quite interesting.

Also, per CDC testing guidelines, the only lab in America that could administer early PCR tests was the CDC’s own lab in Atlanta. This means if I was an esteemed virologist and wanted to do my own PCR testing, I couldn’t do it.

This observation leads me to conclude that whoever controlled the testing, controlled the Pandemic Narrative. (And those who controlled this narrative literally controlled almost 8 billion people in the world.)

The antibody tests were delayed as well …

My “early spread” hypothesis also relies heavily on Americans who experienced Covid symptoms in 2019 or early 2020 and happened to get a positive antibody test once those tests were available.

However, this possible source of “early spread evidence” might not provide overwhelming evidence to support my hypothesis for two main reasons:

1) Very few labs or medical clinics in America offered antibody tests until the last week in April or early May 2020.

2) Even if some people did test positive, the results of these early antibody tests should be ignored as they were almost certainly “false positives,” at least according to most “experts.”

At some point - maybe by June 2020? - the antibody tests started working and could be considered credible … but any tests given in March or April 2020 apparently should not be given credence.

I also don’t understand why it took four months to produce an antibody test that could be given to the public. 

An important early antibody result that

hasn’t gotten enough attention …

Still, a few labs were offering antibody tests in March 2020.

For example, a medical clinic/lab in DelRay Beach, Florida started administering antibody tests in March 2020. According to a Palm Beach Post article from May 16, 2020, the clinic’s CEO said her clinic had given 500 such tests by early May 2020.

The story’s headline news was that 11 Delray Beach, Florida residents from the same subdivision had all tested positive for antibodies and all 11 experienced Covid symptoms in November or December 2019.

But another eye-opening detail was buried in the story. According to the clinic’s CEO, 40 percent of local residents (200 people) who got early antibody tests at this clinic tested positive.

Furthermore, the CEO said she’d reported these findings to the Florida Department of Public Health.  According to The Post, “the state has shared little to no data on those who have tested positive for antibodies.”

My state also has no interest in investigating

possible early cases …

I recently asked the Alabama Department of Public Health if this state health agency ever solicited reports from clinics that were doing early antibody tests and, if so, what were the answers they received?

I was told the agency did not seek such information.

I do know Tim and Brandie McCain of Sylacauga, Alabama got positive antibody test results in late April 2020 and the agency never investigated this couple’s possible early cases (both were sick in December 2019; Tim McCain was hospitalized for 24 days in ICU.)

These anecdotes lead me to believe that public health agencies in America have zero interest in investigating likely “early spread” cases.

A spokesperson for the ADPH told me this health agency believed all antibody tests from this time period were likely “false positives.” It was not stated how experts at the agency would know this for a fact.

Why did the CDC commission these 2 antibody studies

if the agency thought antibody results were insignificant?

I also know that the CDC must believe antibody tests were important because the CDC itself did at least two antibody studies I’ve written about in great detail.

The “Red Cross Antibody” study tested 7,300 units of archived blood collected from blood donors in nine states between December 13, 2019 and mid-January 2020.

According to this study, 39 blood donors (2.03 percent of the tested sample) from California, Washington and Oregon tested positive for antibodies after donating blood Dec. 13-16, 2019.

This sero-positive percentage may or may not impress anyone as significant. For purposes of this article, my main point is simply that the CDC went to a great deal of trouble to test these samples, which means the agency must have thought antibody tests had some significance.

I also note it took the CDC almost a year to publish the results of this one antibody study, which makes me wonder if officials intentionally delayed publishing these results and, if so, why.

Above, I pointed out that the ADPH disregarded the McCains’ positive antibody results, which the couple received April 30 and May 1st, 2020.

I don’t understand this as the CDC and Navy tested 382 sailors on the USS Theodore Roosevelt for antibodies on April 20-24, 2020.

Again, I don’t understand why the CDC would go to all this trouble if the agency was just going to come back and say, “These results can’t be trusted.”

While the Red Cross study found 2.03 percent positives, the Roosevelt study found 60 percent positive.

This, in my opinion, is the biggest antibody headline of the entire pandemic and it barely raised an eyebrow in the Virus Expert World or the MSM.

There’s a reason some investigations can’t be done …

I think I know why the ADPH and CDC didn’t want to investigate the McCains’ possible early cases. The reason for this (IMO) is the McCains said they were sick with Covid symptoms in December 2019 - before China had even reported a new virus to the WHO.

By themselves - if confirmed or proven - the McCains’ cases would blow up the entire virus origin theory put forth by Mr. Science himself, Anthony Fauci.

The strange features of the Roosevelt outbreak …

With the Roosevelt study, the implied conclusion must be that all the sailors who tested positive had been infected on or after the ship made a port-of-call in Vietnam March 5-9, 2020. (The Roosevelt study doesn’t concern itself with how the virus could have gotten on the ship.)

I’ve done a great deal of reading on the Roosevelt “outbreak” and one thing that jumps out to me is what I didn’t find. I didn’t find any stories showing a big rash of sailors going to the ship’s sick bay with Covid symptoms after that Vietnam port-of-call.

If 60 percent of the ship’s sailors had antibody evidence of Covid infection, wouldn’t we expect at least half the positive group of sailors to have experienced some kind of Covid symptoms between March 10 and when crew members got their antibody tests April 20-24?

“Sixty-percent positive” translates to approximately 3,000 crew members (out of a crew of approximately 4,850). If half those who were infected were symptomatic, that would be 1,500 “sick” crew members that ship medical personnel might have been expected to treat after the virus began to spread.

Per my research, there might have been 40 or so sailors that complained of symptoms after the ship left Vietnam - which would be less than 1 percent of the crew. If 100 sailors became “sick,” that’s still just 1-in-48 of the crew (a sick rate for the crew of about 2 percent).

How does this tiny number of sick “cases” among Roosevelt crew members jibe with an antibody study that found 60 percent of the crew had been infected by this virus?

One possible answer might be that many of the sailors who tested positive for antibodies on April 20-24 had NOT been infected between March 5th and April 20th, but had probably been infected weeks or months earlier.

Why didn’t everyone serving on the Roosevelt

test positive for antibodies?

If there was a terrible outbreak on a Naval ship and this virus was spreading for many weeks in such tight congregate settings, why wouldn’t virtually every person on the ship be infected? 

That is, one might expect, say, 90 percent of the crew to have tested positive for antibodies.

One reason this might not have happened is if some significant percentage of the crew had already been infected and thus already had natural immunity. Perhaps, some unknown percentage of the crew didn’t test positive for antibodies because the antibody tests had been given five or six months after they’d contracted the virus. 

Per multiple studies, IgG antibodies fade in “two to three months” in some percentage of people. Also, some small percentage of people never develop antibodies.

Whatever the reason, it’s strange a mega outbreak occurred on the Roosevelt and very few crew members got sick after the date the virus was purported to get on the ship (after the Vietnam port-of-call).

I also note that 60 percent positives on the Roosevelt isn’t that much different than the 40-percent positives the Delray Beach clinic found in the 500 antibody tests it administered between March and April 2020 (the same time the Roosevelt saga was unfolding).

As usual, no interviews …

Just like the CDC refused to interview any of the 200 people from Delray Beach who tested positive for antibodies, the CDC didn’t interview one sailor on the Roosevelt who tested positive for antibodies.

The CDC also only did antibody studies of two ships in the U.S. Naval fleet of more than 100 ships. (An antibody study of crew members who served on USS Kidd destroyer found approximately 41 percent positives).

I think I’m the only journalist in the world who’s asked what the Navy and CDC would have found if they’d performed antibody studies in April 2020 on every sailor who had served on every ship in the U.S. naval fleet.

Apparently, the public is supposed to think a super-contagious virus only infected sailors on two ships.

As I’ve written many times, the greatest red flags of what I believe was a massive cover-up of early spread can be found in all the studies and “origin investigations” that could have (easily) been done … but weren’t done.

In Conclusion …

I believe two major (ignored) scandals  are revealed by a focus on early spread. The first is that millions of people had likely been infected by the date of the lockdowns and this has not been acknowledged or seriously investigated. The second scandal is that some officials must have known this and went to great lengths to conceal evidence of early spread.

The likely motive for this is that “confirmed” evidence of early spread would reveal the virus was not “deadly.” This would mean there was no need for lockdowns or for new experimental mRNA vaccines to save people’s lives - because early spread shows people weren’t at risk of dying.

ADDENDUM:

Note: I added this text in the Reader Comments, but moved it to the archived main story because I think it effectively illustrates my main point.

For those not familiar with all the naval ship antibody studies, there were 3 of them:

- The Roosevelt study - 60 percent positive (about 4,850 crew members).

- The Charles de Gaulle study - about 60 to 63 percent positive (about 1,750 crew members).

- The USS Kidd destroyer study - about 41 percent positive (about 380 sailors).

Summary or take-aways:

Total crew members: About 7,000.

Total (alleged) Covid deaths on all 3 ships: 1.

Total crew members infected, per positive antibody results: About 3,550 crew members (approx).

Infection Fatality Rate on all 3 ships: 1-in-3,550.

Infection Fatality Rate for the flu: 1-in-1,000 (0.1 percent).

So the Covid IFR is much lower than the Flu IFR.

One take-away from these 3 antibody studies: Covid is (or might be) less deadly than the flu.

This message would not produce great fear in the population .. so the Powers that Be didn't want that message resonating with the public.

Ko-Fi Writer tips always appreciated:

https://ko-fi.com/billrice