14 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

I'm no doctor Scottie. Although i was a white-coat in my prime.

In an asylum I presume!

11 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

An impossible pipe-dream... but a researchers gold-mine that will never deliver results

Oh yea of little faith!

1 hour ago, Ralf001 said:

are hot water taps common in Thailand ?

You've had the answer both ways whether they are or not.  And I'm not specifically talking about Thailand when I discuss my personal behaviour. THAT remains the same worldwide 

1 hour ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

An impossible pipe-dream... but a researchers gold-mine that will never deliver results

you might be right.

 

2 hours ago, Ralf001 said:

are hot water taps common in Thailand ?

In Thailand, the cold water goes through a device called a water heater, and comes out hot on the other side.

2 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

I'm no doctor Scottie. Although i was a white-coat in my prime.

 

 

One with the straps and buckles at the back.

3 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

My research over 40+ years

haha, 40+ years research. where did you conduct this research? 

 

It might be fun to make anagrams of your username to see what else it might spell. 

 

Because daddy government said so and the sheep follow. 

7 hours ago, Lacessit said:

In Thailand, the cold water goes through a device called a water heater, and comes out hot on the other side.

 

Yeah... in the shower, what about other taps, Ive not seen hot water in the kitchen very much.

10 hours ago, Lacessit said:

One with the straps and buckles at the back.

In answer to the OP's question; 'Why do people still believe in covid?'. I think on the AN platform, any alternative views on covid and the pandemic, were taken down by moderation for years. So the members were shielded from the truth. Now, they find it hard to accept that there are other discussion points to the main, lockstep narrative.

 

12 hours ago, scottiejohn said:

In an asylum I presume!

 

Now, there is a way of expressing those viewpoints. And it is not easily digested by many of the AN members. Thus they resort to silly one-liners, as that is all they have to offer.

 

9 hours ago, save the frogs said:

haha, 40+ years research. where did you conduct this research? 

 

My research began when I was at Uni back in the day. At medical school we were not encouraged to ask too many questions; even back then. Well, although I was sitting alongside future doctors, I was myself on a one year exchange programme. My study was Exercise Physiology. The exchange gave me access to classes and lectures. And, although, at the end of a lecture, the prof, (or teacher, or doctor), might say; ''Are there any questions?'' The questions I would ask was not what the prof wanted to hear, or answer.

 

My fundamental area of study was energy systems. What allows the body to do what it does? How do muscles actually move? That sort of thing. In the teaching hospital there was the theme of taking each part of the body in isolation. I simply could not accept those general teachings. And at times; said so.

 

When covid arrived on the scene, it amazed me how people could be so easily fooled by white-coats, who, by my own knowledge were not speaking the truth. It rekindled interest in my previous research. And!!! It led to me writing this post now.

 

Nature has all the answers we seek.

 

On 2/14/2025 at 8:06 AM, Red Phoenix said:

I don't see anything positive about it, with the exception of the fake 'positive' results from the sham PCR-test that you were Covid-19 infected.

you have apparently no knowledge or understanding of what the PCR RT tests was, how it was used or what the results meant. The information surrounding it's use as a identification test was unclear and poorly described but it actually did what it was intended to do. It was intended as a monitoring test to conform if you had been exposed to the virus, not whether you were sick or had symptoms. Unfortunately the consistency of cycle rate meaning how many times the test was run to amplify the virus content in the sample was inconsistent company to company and country to country. The intent of the test was to be able to identify those exposed so you could take precautionary action to help curtail the spread. 

41 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Nature has all the answers we seek.

It is a shame that you have all the wrong ones!

12 minutes ago, Dan O said:

you have apparently no knowledge or understanding of what the PCR RT tests was, how it was used or what the results meant. The information surrounding it's use as a identification test was unclear and poorly described but it actually did what it was intended to do. It was intended as a monitoring test to conform if you had been exposed to the virus, not whether you were sick or had symptoms. Unfortunately the consistency of cycle rate meaning how many times the test was run to amplify the virus content in the sample was inconsistent company to company and country to country. The intent of the test was to be able to identify those exposed so you could take precautionary action to help curtail the spread. 

So you just confirm what Red Phoenix meant by mentioning “…Unfortunately the consistency of cycle rate…was inconsistent company to company and country to country. The intent of the test was to be able….the spread”.

It reminds me the story of the surgeon who declared to the patient that they amputated the wrong leg….but initially the intent was to save the patient’s good leg from gangrene.

11 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

It is a shame that you have all the wrong ones!

You are really good at the funny one-liners Scottie. Why don't you post on the joke threads?

 

You, me, the cat, the tree, the volcano, the oceans are all part of nature. Nature doesn't do things for nothing. Given that our bodies are nature, does it not make sense, that the body has specific functions, to ensure certain fundamental things? And the two most basic ones are survival and reproduction. In a nut-shell; that is what it is all about. Along the way, the body needs to protect itself. This it does extremely well.

 

Our problems in health, are essentially twofold. One is the defence system not being up to the task of defending. What does it defend against? Toxins!! Smoke, poisons, chemicals in food, medicines (including vaxxes), EMFs etc.

 

Nature is us. We are nature.

20 minutes ago, Nid_Noi said:

So you just confirm what Red Phoenix meant by mentioning “…Unfortunately the consistency of cycle rate…was inconsistent company to company and country to country. The intent of the test was to be able….the spread”.

It reminds me the story of the surgeon who declared to the patient that they amputated the wrong leg….but initially the intent was to save the patient’s good leg from gangrene.

Interesting to know that the covid all kicked off a couple of months after Dr Kary Mullis died. He consistently said that the PCR test was not a diagnostic tool.

 

Given that the pandemic was mostly gonna be driven by the PCR test, it would obviously be better if the inventor of the test was not about to speak against it.

38 minutes ago, Nid_Noi said:

So you just confirm what Red Phoenix meant by mentioning “…Unfortunately the consistency of cycle rate…was inconsistent company to company and country to country. The intent of the test was to be able….the spread”.

It reminds me the story of the surgeon who declared to the patient that they amputated the wrong leg….but initially the intent was to save the patient’s good leg from gangrene.

No  did not.. I write about the reasoning behind the test and it is a valid test for what it was intended for. To try to claim i agree it was a bad or fake test or gave fake results in any way is not what I said but that was a nice try to gaslight what I wrote.  You almost made it but you can try again after you research and make yourself knowledgeable  or I can school you on it but then you might look foolish

19 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Interesting to know that the covid all kicked off a couple of months after Dr Kary Mullis died. He consistently said that the PCR test was not a diagnostic tool.

 

Given that the pandemic was mostly gonna be driven by the PCR test, it would obviously be better if the inventor of the test was not about to speak against it.

It was longer than a few months and your phrasing or understanding  of his discussion about it being used diagnostically is not accurate and being taken out of the context of the interview and discussion.  The PCR RT  was meant to identify exposure to what is being test for, but not for determining level of contagion or if the patient exposure would continue to grow or if you would show signs of illness or if there would be an increase or decrease, only whether you had exposure to what you are tested for. 

26 minutes ago, Dan O said:

It was longer than a few months and your phrasing or understanding  of his discussion about it being used diagnostically is not accurate and being taken out of the context of the interview and discussion.  The PCR RT  was meant to identify exposure to what is being test for, but not for determining level of contagion or if the patient exposure would continue to grow or if you would show signs of illness or if there would be an increase or decrease, only whether you had exposure to what you are tested for. 

Hi Dan, Sorry to inform you bud, but you are wrong, 

 

Kary died in August 2019, The covid hoax began in November of that year. Quite close you will agree.

 

Lots of PCR testing = many cases. Less testing = less cases.

 

It was all planned well before Dr Mullis passed IMO.

1 hour ago, Dan O said:

On 2/14/2025 at 2:06 AM, Red Phoenix said:

I don't see anything positive about it, with the exception of the fake 'positive' results from the sham PCR-test that you were Covid-19 infected.

you have apparently no knowledge or understanding of what the PCR RT tests was, how it was used or what the results meant. The information surrounding it's use as a identification test was unclear and poorly described but it actually did what it was intended to do. It was intended as a monitoring test to conform if you had been exposed to the virus, not whether you were sick or had symptoms. Unfortunately the consistency of cycle rate meaning how many times the test was run to amplify the virus content in the sample was inconsistent company to company and country to country. The intent of the test was to be able to identify those exposed so you could take precautionary action to help curtail the spread. 

 

What have you been smoking or drinking?

Hahaha > it was intended as a 'monitoring test to conform if you had been exposed to the virus' - How is that different from a test to determine whether you were Covid-19 infected?'

PCR was and is a worthless sham-test used to inflate Covid-cases.

> Do read the article on which this thread is commenting, as that article exposes the whole PCR-sham in detail, and you might learn something...

 

48 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Hi Dan, Sorry to inform you bud, but you are wrong, 

 

Kary died in August 2019, The covid hoax began in November of that year. Quite close you will agree.

 

Lots of PCR testing = many cases. Less testing = less cases.

 

It was all planned well before Dr Mullis passed IMO.

You are way off base and promoting conspiracy of more than one aspect of this scenario and have lost credibility with misleading and false information your posting.

 

The development of RT PCR was well before his death and the beginning of covid. The test was not created for covid but modified like many tests are to detect covid as it can be for many othe virus or infections so you are actually not correct.

 

The beginning of "covid" has not been confirm conclusively as to when it started, except in the world if conspiracies. There are reports of lab worker showing illness similar to the symptoms of covid in Nov but not being reported properly while the main outbreak was in Jan 2020. 

 

The interview comments you used were also disconnected and had nothing to do with covid and comments have been extracted or cherry picked to imply your agenda of conspiracy. That interview and discussion was about HIV. 

 

I worked for 25 years in the industry so have some knowledge  base to rely on and not just half truths and conspiracy. 

 

2 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Nature has all the answers we seek.

Yes... humans have learned much about how nature works.  Nature uses mRNA to instruct the body's protein factory (cells) to make the many thousands of different proteins used in the body for many tasks.  And, just like humans have done in bejillions of different ways, we used nature's methods to produce most things you and all of us use in our daily lives.  Now we use mRNA to produce a few different proteins that we have found in portions of various viruses to stimulate the immune system nature gave us to defend the body against the agents of infection that contain those proteins.  Yes... nature has the answers.

7 hours ago, Ralf001 said:

 

Yeah... in the shower, what about other taps, Ive not seen hot water in the kitchen very much.

Try looking around you instead of intentionally baiting people on here.

 

@Lacessit Ralf001 is probably better ignored as a troll.... Look at his replies to me in this thread😙

30 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

What have you been smoking or drinking?

Hahaha > it was intended as a 'monitoring test to conform if you had been exposed to the virus' - How is that different from a test to determine whether you were Covid-19 infected?'

PCR was and is a worthless sham-test used to inflate Covid-cases.

> Do read the article on which this thread is commenting, as that article exposes the whole PCR-sham in detail, and you might learn something...

 

Your deflecting and trying to parse words to support your inaccurate agenda. Pathetic 

 

By your logic if you never tested for cancer it wouldn't exist. That's bs and that's all you post.  

 

The RT PCR test developed in the 1970's and dramatically improved in the 1980's.  It was Intended as a monitoring test to identify people that had been exposed to a virus, in this case covid, so isolation or proactive protection could be put in place to slow and contain the spread of a virus that showed a high degree of causing death, especially in the elderly or medically compromised. 

 

If you tested positive you had  been in contact with the covid virus, simple as that.  The cycle rates used could indicate a low, medium or high level of virus in the body but could not predict if you would become ill or not, or whether or not the levels would increase or not or if you would be contagious or even show any signs of illness.

 

The one confusion came with the level of cycle rate or replication to amplify the sample that was selected by different countries and test manufacturers as tge "standard".

 

If a positive showed up at a low cycle rate of say 5 to 10 that indicated you had a higher level of virus in your system. If a high cycle rate of say 20 to 25, and showed positive indicating you had low levels in you system but you were still exposed. Above around 25 cycles the amount within your system would be extremely low but again no way to predict how your body would handle the expose. 

 

The test could not tell you if your immune system could handle and control the virus replication in your system but as for accuracy it was very good. 

 

How different governments used the information or set the cycle rates is a separate issue and certaining leads to questions on consistency but every country had their own reasons and reaction to try to contain or prevent outbreaks, which has nothing to do with the test itself. 

 

Do some real research before you make false claims and post misleading Information.  

 

9 minutes ago, Dan O said:

Your deflecting and trying to parse words to support your inaccurate agenda. Pathetic 

 

By your logic if you never tested for cancer it wouldn't exist. That's bs and that's all you post.  

 

The RT PCR test developed in the 1970's and dramatically improved in the 1980's.  It was Intended as a monitoring test to identify people that had been exposed to a virus, in this case covid, so isolation or proactive protection could be put in place to slow and contain the spread of a virus that showed a high degree of causing death, especially in the elderly or medically compromised. 

 

If you tested positive you had  been in contact with the covid virus, simple as that.  The cycle rates used could indicate a low, medium or high level of virus in the body but could not predict if you would become ill or not, or whether or not the levels would increase or not or if you would be contagious or even show any signs of illness.

 

The one confusion came with the level of cycle rate or replication to amplify the sample that was selected by different countries and test manufacturers as tge "standard".

 

If a positive showed up at a low cycle rate of say 5 to 10 that indicated you had a higher level of virus in your system. If a high cycle rate of say 20 to 25, and showed positive indicating you had low levels in you system but you were still exposed. Above around 25 cycles the amount within your system would be extremely low but again no way to predict how your body would handle the expose. 

 

The test could not tell you if your immune system could handle and control the virus replication in your system but as for accuracy it was very good. 

 

How different governments used the information or set the cycle rates is a separate issue and certaining leads to questions on consistency but every country had their own reasons and reaction to try to contain or prevent outbreaks, which has nothing to do with the test itself. 

 

Do some real research before you make false claims and post misleading Information.  

 

 

The authors of the article I posted have a very different view on the 'accuracy' of the PCR test, but of course since you consider yourself an 'expert' you didn't bother reading it. 

And there is no denying that the PCR test has been (mis)used to inflate Covid-19 cases. 

1 hour ago, VBF said:

Try looking around you instead of intentionally baiting people on here.

 

@Lacessit Ralf001 is probably better ignored as a troll.... Look at his replies to me in this thread😙

do you ned a tampon for your weeping orrifice ?

5 hours ago, Dan O said:

If you tested positive you had  been in contact with the covid virus, simple as that. 

Don't agree with you Sir.

 

This is unscientific, made up stuff. It was driving the pandemic; a computer programme.

 

if you tested positive it was an error. If you tested negative it was also wrong. It was/is all utter nonsense. And I'll tell you why Dan. The virus has not yet been shown to exist outside of a computer.

 

Not likely to be found either in my view. And I'll tell you why. A virus is simply a part of cell being broken down. It probably helps the body get rid of the busted cells efficiently. 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Don't agree with you Sir.

 

This is unscientific, made up stuff. It was driving the pandemic; a computer programme.

 

if you tested positive it was an error. If you tested negative it was also wrong. It was/is all utter nonsense. And I'll tell you why Dan. The virus has not yet been shown to exist outside of a computer.

 

Not likely to be found either in my view. And I'll tell you why. A virus is simply a part of cell being broken down. It probably helps the body get rid of the busted cells efficiently. 

 

 

 

Your Google physician's license has expired.   You  mix information from different areas to support a flash agenda,  that is quite misleading as you taking parts of 1 health function and trying to mix it with a different body function and medical process and you have no clue what your saying. The only made up thing here is this misleading and unsupported bs.  

 

 

Here images of the actual virus not one found in a computer.  I guess you'll thing this was made up. Sad 

 

https://www.sciencealert.com/this-is-what-the-covid-19-virus-looks-like-under-electron-microscopes. 

 

 

 

Don't reply because your posts are untruth and not factual and it is a waste of time to try to explain this topic to you.  Have a great life 

39 minutes ago, Dan O said:

Your Google physician's license has expired.   You  mix information from different areas to support a flash agenda,  that is quite misleading as you taking parts of 1 health function and trying to mix it with a different body function and medical process and you have no clue what your saying. The only made up thing here is this misleading and unsupported bs.  

 

 

Here images of the actual virus not one found in a computer.  I guess you'll thing this was made up. Sad 

 

https://www.sciencealert.com/this-is-what-the-covid-19-virus-looks-like-under-electron-microscopes. 

 

 

 

Don't reply because your posts are untruth and not factual and it is a waste of time to try to explain this topic to you.  Have a great life 

Seen many images of so-called 'viruses' through electron microscopy thanks Dan. They are indistinguishable from the other cell debris.

11 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Seen many images of so-called 'viruses' through electron microscopy thanks Dan. They are indistinguishable for the other cell debris.

You cant argue with people that believe their own lies. 

12 hours ago, Dan O said:

You are way off base and promoting conspiracy of more than one aspect of this scenario and have lost credibility with misleading and false information your posting.

 

The development of RT PCR was well before his death and the beginning of covid. The test was not created for covid but modified like many tests are to detect covid as it can be for many othe virus or infections so you are actually not correct.

 

The beginning of "covid" has not been confirm conclusively as to when it started, except in the world if conspiracies. There are reports of lab worker showing illness similar to the symptoms of covid in Nov but not being reported properly while the main outbreak was in Jan 2020. 

 

The interview comments you used were also disconnected and had nothing to do with covid and comments have been extracted or cherry picked to imply your agenda of conspiracy. That interview and discussion was about HIV. 

 

I worked for 25 years in the industry so have some knowledge  base to rely on and not just half truths and conspiracy. 

 

Working in the industry for 25 years does not make you knowledgeable. Fauci worked for 40 years in the industry and Joseph Mengele had an MD and PhD certification. Knowledge is not a reference, it’s what you do with it.

Regarding COVID (if there had been such a virus called SARS-Cov-2), the major outbreak started well before January 2020.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7813667/

 

Athletes at the World military games in Wuhan mid October 2019 had already experienced sickness symptoms.

I was in Xuangchen , east of Wuhan and the Wuhan exodus had already started. Most trains going westbound were almost empty while the eastbound trains for Shanghai were packed.

Wuhan lockdown was 3rd week of January.

 

It may have started during the summer of 2019 based on certain observations of social media posts and hospital activity in the Wuhan area.

 

https://www.technologynetworks.com/tn/news/coronavirus-could-have-been-in-wuhan-in-august-2019-according-to-harvard-study-335887

 

Anyway RT.PCR is just garbage but it made some people very wealthy.