All Threads

7 days 30 days All time Recent Popular
I urge all followers who have read my criticisms of PCR mass testing in U.K. to carefully read Mr Fordhamā€™s carefully worded letter. Note that the innovation minister in the Lords, Lord Bethel, already admitted that the PCR system doesnā€™t have the equivalent of an MOT. https://t.co/zXzeDMKCBb


Without this information itā€™s impossible to interpret any result. If the oFPR is 4%, for example, and if the true prevalence is 0.3% (itā€™s probably less), then for every 10,000 tests, 400 positives would be false & 30 positives would be genuine. So 93% of positives are false.

As Mr Fordham points out, almost all policies pivot on PCR mass testing. Hancock previously admitted on talkRADIO to Julia Hartley-Brewer in late summer that the FPR was ā€œjust under 1%ā€. That was a flat lie (possibly inadvertent but heā€™s never corrected the record). The reason...

...we are sure Hancock told a lie is that they have never known the FPR. Those including Hancock who believe that the oFPR can be estimated by inspection of the lowest positivity ever recorded, while logical, is completely wrong. Changes in personnel, throughout, testing...

...architecture & the like can radically alter the oFPR. Since Hancockā€™s remark in late summer, PCR mass testing has moved into the Lighthouse Labs & this creates a new & urgent need to continually assess oFPR. Iā€™ve good reason to believe itā€™s now VERY much higher now that the...