NY Times Raises Questions About COVID Testing [Updated]

AP featured image
Journalist Brian Fuss holds up COVID-19 testing information after receiving a coronavirus test by the White House Medical Unit before attending a news conference with President Donald Trump in the press briefing room at the White House, Thursday, April 9, 2020, in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)



“The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.” 
― Thomas Jefferson 


[EDITOR’S NOTE: After review, we are retracting this article. In light of an interpretation of this New York Times article by Health Feedback, the article has been ruled as false/misleading. We regret the convenience to our readers.]

The New York Times just reported something incredible.

You know those standard PCR tests for the COVID-19 virus that everybody in America has been rushing out to get? Well, according to the Times, they’re “diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus” and “are not likely to be contagious.”

In fact, when they looked at three sets of testing data from Massachusetts, New York, and Nevada, the Times says that, because of faulty procedures used at every single testing site in the country, “up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus” at all.

The experts they talked to were astonished that such cases are even getting classified as infections.

Not surprising since, as we’ll see, in the first of many curious understatements about how bad the scandal they’re reporting on really is, the research the Times cites actually suggests that those bogus positive tests they discovered were given to people carrying no virus whatsoever, not just insignificant amounts, as they report. And they’re upper bound of 90% for bogus positives is likely too low as well.

But, since they do admit that defective methods which are standard operating procedure literally everywhere inflated the number of positive tests by a factor of ten in one random sample, this would be big news even were it no worse than the Times is letting on.

Over 85 million PCR tests were given in the U.S. since dreading COVID-19 replaced baseball as our national pastime. At around $15o a pop, that’s almost $13 billion that, if the New York Times is right, was flushed down the toilet on a test that’s essentially worthless.

Not to mention all the wasted hours and inconvenience suffered.

The massive fraud perpetrated on the American people – who were led to believe that PCR testing represents the “gold standard” for detecting COVID-19 infections – must be one of the biggest scams in history.

Apart from the squandered money, think of all the anxiety suffered by the over 7 million Americans who got back a positive result. Yet, even according to the Times, most of them – and maybe even the vast majority – likely had only traces of the virus too minute and harmless to classify as an infection.

Philadelphia’s Temple University just canceled all in-person classes for every single one of its 40,000 students for at least two weeks because 103 of them tested positive for COVID-19. The Times report appears to show that all that uproar and disruption – which has been breaking out incessantly all across America for months now – had no justification.

Last week I reported that the enormous “second wave” of COVID-19 infections America supposedly suffered in July never really happened. That steep rise in the daily number of positive tests we heard so much about was caused by a massive increase in the number of people being tested every day that we didn’t.

The Times report, however, makes the increase in absolute case numbers itself garbage. According to the experts they consulted, procedures universally applied caused 90% of the positive diagnoses in one randomly selected set of tests to be bogus.

So you’d think the New York Times would be trumpeting their findings as an earth-shattering piece of investigative reporting and maybe even dusting off a place on the shelf for a Pulitzer Prize.

But this is another area where the Times exhibits a strange reluctance to run with the implications of their own report.

That eye-popping stat that “up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus” isn’t even featured in the headline. Instead, the Times went with one that couldn’t possibly have downplayed their astonishing discovery more:

Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be.

Moreover, not once does the Times even mention all the money and time wasted or the havoc unleashed because Americans were encouraged to falsely believe that a test they’re now reporting is complete garbage was “the gold standard.”

Their story is written from the same “destroy the village to save it” perspective that’s guided our response to COVID-19 since the early days in March, when it suddenly became the idée fixe dominating every second of our lives.

Slowing down COVID’s spread by any means necessary is presented as the only thing that matters. Not inflicting collateral hardship, misery, and death on the American people doesn’t even register as a priority.

Nor, of course, does respecting our rights.

And the key to unlocking the mystery of why the New York Times is exposing a tiny part of an historically unprecedented scandal while making sure to keep the rest firmly out of sight lies in the perfect means COVID-19 has provided for convincing the American people to surrender their God-given right to liberty without even putting up a fight.

… Part 2 is up.
Same Red-time.
 Same Red-channel.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on RedState Videos