First Bible Network
First Bible Network

Episode 10 · 1 year ago

Case Closed: The Covid scam has its roots in a New York Times article written 13 years ago


As the World Health Organization finally admits that PCR tests are generating false positives we decided to dig a little deeper and found a New York Times news story that describes "the pandemic that wasn't" and how it was caused by - you guessed it - false PCR results. Thirteen years ago it was an accident but many are saying what's happening now is by design. Listen closely before you get that experimental RNA vaccination.

Links mentioned in the show:

2007 New York Times PCR pandemic news story:

WHO false positives data:

Religious Vaccination Exemption Forms (that you can download now):

Employers can now bar unvaccinated workers, says EEOC:

Bookmark the Right Bible Podcast:


Stripping away two thousand years a falsedoctrine isn't easy, but we've had lots of coffee. Now your host,Darren Kalamba, and happy Sunday morning to you. This is Darren Klama withanother addition of the Right Bible podcast. You know, there's nothing mysterious aboutthe fake covid plague. It already happened in a two thousand and seven NewYork Times article, and the P under the magician shell is named PCR.That's right, the same PCRP that we have today. And what we're goingto do is read it verbatim, this New York Times article, and willhave links so you can follow along as we trace everything that's happened back tothis single story. Now it doesn't matter if they delete the story from theirsearch engine. We have the original archived in its original format, including theads, exactly as it appeared in print and on the wet. Now we'realso archiving at in our encrypted tour onion sight, just to be safe,because you never know what an unfortunate kayaking accident can happen. Now, thegenesis of the scam called covid that's now culminating with you being injected with anexperimental and deadly R and a vaccine has its roots in a bizarre story thatwas first reported on January twenty two, two thousand and seven. Now later, you're going to see how it all ties into the admission from the WorldHealth Organization that PCR tests are being set to artificially create false positives. Let'sgo back to that story and I guess back in time. The headline readsfaith in quick test leads to epidemic that wasn't. And under this thirteen yearold headline as a picture of a very concerned looking seated doctor talking to afemale patient who's guess what, wearing a mask just like the ones you seetoday. The story begins Dr Brook Herndon...

...and Internesst to Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, could not stop coughing for two weeks starting in mid April last year.She coughed seemingly non stop, followed by another week when she coughed sporadically,annoying, she said everyone who worked with her before long, Dr Catherine Kirkland, an infectious disease specialist at Dartmouth, had a chilling thought. could shebe seeing the start of a whooping cough epidemic. By late April, otherhealthcare workers at the hospital were coughing, and severe, intractable coughing is awhooping cough hall mark, and if it was whooping cough, the epidemic hadto be contained immediately because the disease could be deadly to babies in the hospitaland could lead to pneumonia in the frail and vulnerable adult patient there. Itwas the start of a bizarre episode at the Medical Center. The story ofthe epidemic that wasn't four months nearly everyone involved thought the Medical Center had hada huge whooping cough outbreak with extensive ramifications nearly onezero healthcare workers at the hospitalin Lebanon, New Hampshire. We're given a preliminary test and furloughed from workuntil the results were in. In one hundred forty two people, including DrHerndon, were told they appeared to have the disease and thousands were given antibioticsand a vaccine for protection. Hospital beds were taken out of commission, includingsome in intensive care. And by the way, I'm just going to interjectquickly here. Does any of this kind of sound familiar to you? Hospitalbeds taken out of commission vaccines. What do we have? The hospital shipsbrought in from the military and New York City. This should all be ringingsome bells with you as we go through the story, so let's let's goahead and get back into it. Then, about eight months later, healthcare workerswere dumb founded to receive an email...

...message from the hospital administration informing themthat the whole thing was a false alarm. Not a single case of whooping coughwas confirmed with a definitive test growing the bacteria in Boord of tell aper tussis in the laboratory. Instead, it appears the healthcare workers were probablyafflicted with ordinary respiratory diseases like the common coal now is they look back onthe episode, epidemiologists and Infectious Disease Specialists say the problem was that they placedtoo much faith in a quick and highly sensitive molecular tests that led them astray. Infectious disease experts say such tests are coming into increasing use and maybe theonly way to get a quick answer in diagnosing diseases like whooping cough, lesionaire'sbird flu, tuberculosis and stars and deciding whether an epidemic is under way.There are no national data on pseudo epidemics caused by an overreliance on such moleculartests. As Dr Trisham Pearl, and epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins and past Presidentof the Society of Healthcare Epidemiologists of America, but she said pseudo epidemics happen allthe time. The Dartmouth case may have been one of the largest,but it was by no means and exception. She said there was a similar whoopingcough scaret children's Hospital in Boston last fall that involved thirty six adults andtwo children. Definitive tests, though, did not find pertussis. It's aproblem. We know it's a problem, Dr Pearl said. My guess isthat what happened at Dartmouth is going to become more common. Many of thenew molecular tests are quick but technically demanding, and each laboratory may do them inits own way. These tests, called Home Brews, are not commerciallyavailable and there are no good estimates of their error rates. But their verysensitivity makes false positives likely, and when...

...hundreds or thousands of people are tested, as occurred at Dartmouth, false positives can make it seem like there isan epidemic. You're in a little bit of no man's land with the newmolecular test, says Dr Mark Perkins, and Infectious Disease Specialist and chief ScientificOfficer at the foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, a nonprofit foundation supported by the billand Melinda Gates Foundation. All bets are off on exact performance. Ofcourse, that leads to the question of why rely on them at all.At face value, obviously they shouldn't be doing it, Dr Pearl said.But she said often, when answers are needed and an organism like the protessisbacterium is finicky and hard to grow in a laboratory, you don't have greatoptions. Waiting to see if the bacteria grow can take weeks, but thequick molecular test can be wrong. It's almost like you're trying to pick theleast of two evils. Dr Pearl said. At Dartmouth did, the decision wasto use a test to PCR, for polly Murray's chain reaction. Itis a molecular test that until recently was confined to molecular biology laboratories. That'skind of what's happening, said Dr Catherine Edwards. An infectious disease specialist andprofessor of Pediatrics at Vanderbilt University. That's the reality out there. We're tryingto figure out how to use methods that have been the per view of BenScientists. The Dartmouth whooping cough story shows what can ensue. To say theepisode was disruptive was an understatement, said Dr Elizabeth Talbot, deputy State Epidemiologistfor the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services. You cannot imagine,Dr Talbot said. I had a feeling... the time that this gave usa shadow of a hint of what it must be like during a pandemic fluepidemic. Yet epidemiologists say one of the most troubling aspects of the pseudo epidemicis that all the decisions seemed so sensible at the time. Dr Katrina Kreutzinger, a medical epidemiologist at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, whoworked on the case along with her colleague Dr Minisha Patel, does not faultthe Dartmouth doctors. The issue was not that they overreacted or did anything inAP oprey at all at all, Dr Kretsinger said, instead, it isthat there is often no way to decide early on whether an epidemic is underway. Before the S we a pertussis vaccine for children was introduced, whoopingcough was a leading cause of death and young children. The vaccine led toan eighty percent drop in the diseases incidents, but did not completely eliminate it.That's because the vaccines effectiveness wanes after about a decade and although there isnow a new vaccine for adolescence and adults, it is only starting to come intouse. Whooping Cough, Dr Kretzinger said, is still a concern.The disease got its name from its most salient feature. Patients may cough andcough and cough until they have to gasp for breath, making us sound likea whoop. The coughing can last so long that one of the common namesfor whooping cough was the one hundred day cough, Dr Talbot said. Butneither coughing long and hard, nor even whooping is unique to pertussis infections,and many people with whooping cough had symptoms like those of the common cold,a running nose or an ordinary cough. Almost everything about the clinical presentation ofPertussis, especially early. Pertussis is not very specific. Dr Kirkland said.That was the first problem in deciding whether...

...there was an epidemic at dark with. The second was with PCR, the quick test to diagnose the disease,Dr Kretzinger said. With Pertussis, she said there are probably one hundred differentPCR protocols and methods being used throughout the country and it is unclear how oftenany of them are accurate. We have had a number of outbreaks where webelieve that, despite the presence of PCR positive results, the disease was notper tussis. Dr Kretzinger added. At Dartmouth, when the first suspect pertussis case emerged and PCR test showed per tusses, doctors believed it. Theresults seemed completely consistent with the patient symptoms. That's how the whole thing got started. Dr Kirkkins said. Then the doctors decided to test people who didnot have severe coughing. Because we had cases where we thought per tussis andbecause we had vulnerable patients at the hospital, we lowered our threshold. She said. Anyone who had a cough got a PCR test and so did anyonewith a running nose who work with high risk patients like infants. That's howwe ended up with a hundred thirty four suspect cases, Dr Kirkland said,and that, she added, was why one thousand four hundred forty five healthcareworkers ended up taking antibiotics and four thousand five hundred twenty four healthcare workers atthe hospital, or seventy two percent of all the healthcare workers there, werethen immunized against whooping cough in a matter of days. If we had stoppedthere, I think we all would have agreed that we had had an outbreakof Pertussis and that we had controlled that, Doctor Kirkland said. But epidemiologists atthe hospital in working for the states of New Hampshire and Vermont, decidedto take extra steps to confirm what they were really seeing was pertussis. TheDartmouth doctor sent samples from twenty seven patients they thought had pertussis to the statehealth departments and the Centers for Disease Control.

There scientists tried to grow the bacteria, process that can take weeks. Finally they had their answer. Therewas no pertussis in any of the samples. We thought. Well, that's odd. Doctor Kirkland said. Maybe it's the timing of the culturing. Maybeit's a transport problem. Why don't we try serological testing? Certainly after apertussis infection a person should develop antibodies to the bacteria. But they can onlyget suitable blood samples from thirty nine patients. The others had gotten the vaccine,which itself Elicits pertussis antibodies. But when the Centers for Disease Control testedthose thirty nine samples, its scientists reported that only one showed increases in antibodylevels indicative of Pertussis. The Disease Center did additional tests as well, includingmolecular tests to look for features of the pertussis bacteria. It's science tiss alsodid additional PCR tests on samples from one hundred sixteen of the one hundred thirtyfour people who were thought to have had whooping cough. Only one PCR waspositive, but other tests did not show that the person was infected with pertussisbacteria. The Disease Center also interviewed patients in depth to see what their symptomswere and how they evolved. It was going on for months. Dr Kirklandsaid, but in the end the conclusion was clear. There was no pertussisepidemic. We were all somewhat surprised, Dr Kirkland said, and we wereleft in a very frustrating situation about what to do when the next outbreak comes. Dr Cathy, a petty and infectious disease specialist at the University of Utah, said the story had one clear lesson. The big message is that every labis vulnerable to having false positives, Dr Petty said. No single testresult is absolute, and that is even more important with a test result basedon PCR. As for Dr Herndon,...

...though she now knows she's off thehook, I thought it might have caused the epidemic, she said. Now, with that story fresh in your mind, we're going to look at a statementjust released by the World Health Organization regarding PCR tests and false results.Here's a an article taken from the off Guardian Dot Org. The World Healthorganist station released a guidance memo on December fourteen warning that high cycle thresholds onPCR tests will result in false positives. While this information is accurate, itis also been available for months, so we must ask why are they reportingit now? Is it to make it appear that the vaccines work? TheGold Standard Stars cove two tests are based on polymerase chain reaction, or PCR. PCR works by taking nucleotides, tiny fragments of DNA or RNA, andreplicating them until they become something large enough to identify. The replication is donein cycles, with each cycle doubling the amount of genetic material. The numberof cycles it takes to produce something identifiable is known as the cycle threshold orCT value. The higher the CT value, the less likely you are to bedetecting anything significant. This new who memo states that using a highct valueto test for the presence of Stars Cove Two will result in false positive results. To quote their own words, users of URTPCR reagents should read the ifucarefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is necessary to accountfor any background noise which may lead to a specimen with a high cycle thresholdor CET value result being interpreted as a positive result. Of course, noneof this is news to anyone who has...

...been paying attention. That PCR testswere easily manipulated and potentially highly inaccurate, has been one of the off repeatedbattle cries of those of us opposing the pandemic narrative and the policies it's beingused to sell. Many articles have been written about it by many experts inthe field, medical journalists and other researchers. It's been commonly available knowledge for monthsnow that any test using a CT value over thirty five is potentially meaningless. Dr Carrie Mullus, who won the Nobel Prize for inventing the PCR process, was clear that it wasn't meant as a diagnostic tool, saying, andI quote, with PCR, if you do it well, you can findalmost anything in anybody. And commenting on cycle thresholds, Mollus also one saidif you have to go more than forty cycles to amplify a single copied gene, there's something seriously wrong with your PCR. The mqe guidelines for PCR you stateC Q values higher than forty are suspect because of the implied low efficiencyand generally should not be reported. Now this has all been public knowledge sincethe beginning of the lockdown. The Australian government's own website admitted the tests wereflawed and a cord in Port Portugal ruled they were not fit for purpose.Even doctor Anthony Fauci has publicly admitted that a cycle threshold over thirty five isgoing to be detecting, and I quote, dead Nucleotides, unquote, not aliving virus. Despite all this, it is known that many labs aroundthe world have been using PCR tests with seat values over thirty five or eveninto the low forties. So why has the WHO finally decided to say thisis wrong? What reason could they have for finally choosing to recognize this simplereality? The answer to that is potentially...

...shockingly cynical. We have a vaccinenow, so we don't need false positives any more. Now, notionally,the system has produced its Miracle Cure. So, after everyone has been vaccinated, all the PCR test being done will be done under the new who guidelinesand running only twenty five to thirty cycles instead of over thirty five cycles.Low and behold, the number of quote unquote, positive cases will now suddenlyplumme it and we will have confirmed that our miracle vaccine works. After monthsof flooding the data pool with false positives. miscounting death by accident, adding covidnineteen related death to every other death certificate. They can now stop thecreate a pandemic machine can be turned down to zero again. So, atthe end of all this, from the very words of the vaunted New YorkTimes and the world of Health Organization, what do we have? We havean accident from thirteen years ago being weaponized and used in propaganda to vaccinate largeportions of the world. And just today the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruled thatemployers can bar unvaccinated employees from entering the workplace. Think about that. Inother words, this is how they got us from flatten the curve to vaccinateor be fired in under a year, and they did it using the PCRscam. In our next episode we'll take a look at what's actually in thisvaccine that they're so excited about injecting you with. I'm Derren Caloma and willsee you next time on the right Bible podcast. Derren Klomi here with theright Bible podcast, reminding you that the Cross can also be your shield.Protect yourself with religious exemption affidavits for covid testing, masks and dangerous vaccinations churchapproved and sanctioned by scripture. Download yours...


In-Stream Audio Search


Search across all episodes within this podcast

Episodes (64)