Guest Post: Dot – Flu/Covid whats the difference?



This is a CDC notice to all labs to stop using the Feb 2020 RT-PCR test and switch to a multiplexed method that can distinguish between various Covid viruses and influenza.


This is seriously a game changer.

This is an ADMISSION by the CDC that since Feb 2020 the ‘covid stats’ have been a total fabrication.

Almost everyone who tested positive had the flu virus not covid-19.



Holy ****, it’s just like how they rig voting.

The cases and votes are what they are, but who controls the COUNTING?

This entry was posted in Covid. Bookmark the permalink.

51 Responses to Guest Post: Dot – Flu/Covid whats the difference?

  1. Indolent says:

    Are we sure our politicians are aware of this?

    Does anyone have a group email to let the poor darlings know?

    It does rather undercut their lockdown excuses.

    Report comment
  2. egg_ says:

    One Rosie does not a pandemic make.

    Report comment
  3. rosie says:

    Fantastic contribution, as always.

    Report comment
  4. twostix says:

    The chairman of the Thomas Reuters Foundation also sits on the board of Pfizer.

    Thanks for your ‘fact check’ from Reuters, Tokyo Rosie.

    Report comment
  5. rosie says:

    Conspiracies, I see them everywhere.

    Report comment
  6. Indolent says:

    My email to Mark Latham –

    Dear Mr. Latham,

    I must say that, unfortunately, your recent support for our freedom and human rights has been wobbly at best.

    Perhaps this will stiffen your spine –

    It is an official release from the Centre for Disease Control in the U.S. stating that the PCF test is not fit for purpose, that it not only can’t tell the difference between variants of Covid, but even between viruses, which would explain the mysterious disappearance of flu and pneumonia from our data since last year.

    Take a moment to think about this. This country is rapidly being turned into a totalitarian gulag on the pretence of keeping us safe. Safe from what? The common cold? The test we are being forced to take can’t tell the difference – and that is the official view.

    You might also have noticed that the vaccines don’t work. Recipients are just as susceptible to catching and spreading Covid as anyone else, but with the added risk of serious side effects. Why, then, are we almost at the point of coercion to take these risky and ineffective drugs? The only real beneficiaries are the pharmaceutical companies. Are they who our governments are working for? Serious question.

    Please use your well known gifts and government platform to help free us from this tyranny and let us get back to making our own decisions about our own lives and bodies.

    Yours sincerely

    Report comment
  7. jo says:

    Rosie you’re starting to sound like munty. Being frightened is a natural human response but it seems to me now you’re got buyers remorse and are trying to justify a bad buy

    Report comment
  8. KARABAR says:

    You are spot on Dot.
    Nothing reported or believed regarding theplandemic is believable, because the ‘test’ i s nonsense.
    Note the similarity the plandemic has with ‘climate change’. Everything rests on religious belief that CO2 hass something to do with the weather; but that is nonsense.
    It reminds one of a Nietzsche quote:
    “I am not upset because you lied. I am upset that from now on I cannot believe you.”
    That applies to SCOMO, Mike Hunt, Gladys, Dan the Dick, etc.

    Report comment
  9. twostix says:

    You forgot Snopes and Huffington Post, my super duper conservative ‘notafan’.

    Report comment
  10. Shy Ted says:

    Pardon my skepticism but anybody who believes the CDC now has a test for a phantom virus that hasn’t been isolated yet needs an EEG (their head tested in the old vernacular). These people lie as they breathe. One day, a little bored, I perused the CDC site willy nilly. When you get to zombie preparedness
    despite their weasel words, yeah, nah, I’ll wait for these new tests to be discredited. In about 18 months. Or 6 lockdowns. Or 1 long lockdown.
    I’s always thought of Dot as a lady, prolly cos I have an aunt Dorothy who loves being called Dottie. So whether your M or F or haven’t decided, Dot, thanks for the CAD tip. I’m up and the price didn’t drop all weekend!

    Report comment
  11. egg_ says:

    Conspiracies, I see them everywhere.


    We’re all conspiring to take down the more enlightened Rosie?

    Report comment
  12. egg_ says:

    7/14 comments have been hectoring by the allegedly “Rosie” one.

    Report comment
  13. John Brumble says:

    Though it pains me to agree with Notafan, I guess I can take solace in the stopped clock theory.
    The Reuters summary of the original CDC post is accurate. Please read both the original and the fact check again. Continuing to push the line that the CDC post says something it doesn’t makes you look illiterate and takes away from the many legitimate criticisms that exist.

    Report comment
  14. calli says:


    Perhaps in the US. This report was posted by Woolfe yesterday.

    Note the causes of death onpage 9.

    6,300 in 18 months is not inconsequential. But it does make the panic over Covid interesting, given social distancing and other measures are supposed to work. You would think that number would be much, much lower because people are being cautious. Yet our death-by-covid, the driver of all the re-jigged behaviour, is considerably lower.

    Report comment
  15. rosie says:

    Heartbreaking news.

    Report comment
  16. rosie says:

    So and so sorry eggtroll for linking other sources because Reuters was unacceptable.

    Report comment
  17. struth says:

    Conspiracies, I see them everywhere.
    Even when they’ve been proven facts.

    Report comment
  18. Franx says:

    Going by the fact check:
    The current test differentiates between viruses.
    Hence the new test in the pipeline which will really and truly differentiate between viruses.

    Report comment
  19. rickw says:


    This is the most telling fact. The flu didn’t disappear, it just started getting mis-diagnosed.

    This is explosive. Two years of destruction built on BS testing. Where were all our health experts on this most fundamental issue? How accurate is the test method….

    Complete idiots.

    Report comment
  20. Dot says:

    I am unsure how Reuters “fact checked” the CDC.

    Seems like fake news. 😎

    Report comment
  21. Ragu says:

    I can’t really see any other way to interpret this;

    《This is not due to the tests failing or confusing SARS-CoV-2 with influenza, however, but in order to transition toward using a test that can facilitate the diagnosis of both viruses.》

    I don’t expect anyone to admit fault in this brave new world, however, that is most definitely an admission that there exists a problem.

    Report comment
  22. John Brumble says:

    “I am unsure how Reuters “fact checked” the CDC.”

    I can’t see that anyone has said that they did. Reuters are claiming they are fact-checking the claims about the CDC release by others.

    For your future clients’ sake, Dot, I hope your assessment of legal precedent is better than the sample of reading comprehension on display here.

    Report comment
  23. A Lurker says:

    Below is a link to an interesting article. The article is translated from the original Swedish into English and is a commentary about the recent leak of Pfizer’s contractual agreement with various nation states (which I suspect includes Australia) which are using the Pfizer vaccine. As always, take what is written with a grain of salt, but even then, what is written really does explain much of the irrationality of many of our State and Federal Governments’ decisions over the last year and a half.

    Report comment
  24. Ragu says:

    I haven’t read too many fact-checks over the years, but if the standard is repeating the original article and adding at the end “cmon guys it all legit. Who wants to see me hit some zingers?!” – then they are pissweak and inviting doubt and criticism

    Report comment
  25. KARABAR says:

    It is interesting to note that waaaay back, in October 2020, the Australian TGA web site section “for health care professionals” noted that “the RT-PCR test is unrealiable and unacceptable for determining the quantity of viral load”.
    They have known about it all along.

    Report comment
  26. rickw says:

    Am I right in saying that half the country is locked up right now because The Mongs testing protocol is BS?

    Report comment
  27. Dot says:

    *I can’t see that anyone has said that they did. Reuters are claiming they are fact-checking the claims about the CDC release by others*

    I can’t take Reuters seriously.

    Report comment
  28. Baba says:

    I can’t take Reuters seriously.

    People continually accuse the MSM of bias when it’s more often just laziness.

    MSM outlets simply regurgitating copy from Reuters, AP and other leftist ‘wire’ services.

    Of course MSM laziness and wire services bias is a happy marriage.

    Report comment
  29. John Smith101 says:

    Reuters are claiming they are fact-checking the claims about the CDC release by others.

    Reuters should have dug a little deeper: from the FDA we have Lab Alert: Changes to CDC RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Testing, we have:

    During the early months of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, clinical specimens were not readily available to developers of IVDs to detect SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, the FDA authorized IVDs based on available data from contrived samples generated from a range of SARS-CoV-2 material sources (for example, gene specific RNA, synthetic RNA, or whole genome viral RNA) for analytical and clinical performance evaluation. While validation using these contrived specimens provided a measure of confidence in test performance at the beginning of the pandemic, it is not feasible to precisely compare the performance of various tests that used contrived specimens because each test validated performance using samples derived from different gene specific, synthetic, or genomic nucleic acid sources.

    Report comment
  30. Dot says:

    Let it be known this post was recycled from a comment of mine – which I cut and pasted from elsewhere, a reaction to a video posted IIRC.

    Report comment
  31. John Smith101 says:

    From the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel Instructions for Use handbook, page 3, under the heading: Intended Use we have:

    Results are for the identification of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. SARS-CoV-2 RNA is generally detectable in upper and lower respiratory specimens during infection. Positive results are indicative of active infection with SARS-CoV-2 but do not rule out bacterial infection or co-infection with other viruses. The agent detected may not be the definite cause of disease.

    In other words, the PCR test does not differentiate between viruses and, by the looks of it, bacteria as well.

    Report comment
  32. Dot says:

    Great find, Citizen Smith.

    Report comment
  33. Kneel says:

    “Am I right in saying that half the country is locked up right now because The Mongs testing protocol is BS?”

    Well, certainly partially, at least.

    No less a personage than Fau-Xi has said publicly that Ct values above 34 are just “scraps” of RNA and non-indicative of infection. Ct values around 24-26 are widely recognised as required to indicate actual infection, at least pre-symptomatic, with 15 or so for a “full” infection.

    There is no indication of Ct on your COVID test results, just a yea or nay.

    I have no evidence, yet have heard that Ct of over 40 is sometimes required to “get” a positive, even as high as 45.
    The Ct value then is highly relevant in deciding if someone needs to be isolated (ie, likely infectious), yet this vital information is apparently not recorded and certainly is not given to the patient, so they can discuss with their own doctor.

    But even so, on the Ruby Princess only about 20% actually got the disease, despite unavoidable close contacts, shared air ventilation etc, and a relatively old population of passengers. Clearly then, the “contact tracing” and later testing and isolation (regardless of test results!), not to mention lockdowns, is over-the-top.

    Delta variant appears to follow the “usual” respiratory virus pattern of becoming more contagious and less dangerous at the same time (that’s a survival trait for such virii).


    Why are masks (cloth ones at that, which are near useless) mandatory when there is zero evidence of any benefit as well as significant evidence that young children are especially at risk from wearing one for extended periods (hypercapnia, dry mouth, facial development disfiguration and others)?

    Why are schools shut when kids are at significantly greater risk of death or serious injury from normal seasonal flu than covid, and almost never pass covid on to adults?

    Why are lockdowns used when – once again – there is no evidence of benefit and evidence all they achieve is delay, not prevention (ref: Sweden vs, Aus)?

    Why are we still being told that the vaxes are the key to getting back to normal, when highly vaxed states like Gilbraltar, Israel, the UK and even the USA are going back to the same measures we are stuck with because “Delta bad”?

    What purpose other than authoritarian control do “vaccine passports” serve, when even US CDC says vaxed and infected individuals are just as much a “shedding” threat as the unvaxed infected?

    Will the vaxes become mandatory in all but name, despite no long term data on side effects, especially given that all previous vaxes for corona virii failed the tests the current crop has not undergone, and despite the fact that international human rights agreements signed by Australia specifically state that such a mandate is illegal for “experimental” products (which the current vaxes are)?

    With apparently around 10% of attendees at B. H. Obama’s 60th birthday – who were mostly vaxed and not wearing masks – testing positive to covid since, will said birthday boy be charged like the plebs? (OK, rhetorical – of course he wont be, he’s part of the “sophisticated” crowd, doncha know – so says NBC, so must be true)

    Report comment
  34. Kneel says:

    “In other words, the PCR test does not differentiate between viruses and, by the looks of it, bacteria as well.”

    That’s NOT what that says.

    It says that SARS-COV-2, even if present, may not be the cause of the disease the patient is suffering. IOW, you may have covid AND seasonal flu, and it may be the flu that is causing you grief, not the covid. Or visa versa. The test does not say which pathogen is causing your symptoms, merely that the specified pathogen (ie, covid) is present.

    Report comment
  35. John Smith101 says:

    As regards Ct values in PCR tests we have the following from: Medical Product Alert, Nucleic acid testing (NAT) technologies that use real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for detection of SARS-CoV-2, WHO-identifier: 2020/5, version 1, 7 December 2020

    From the Alert:
    Description of the problem: WHO has received user feedback on an elevated risk for false SARS-CoV-2 results when testing specimens using RT-PCR reagents on open systems.
    As with any diagnostic procedure, the positive and negative predictive values for the product in a given testing population are important to note. As the positivity rate for SARS-CoV-2 decreases, the positive predictive value also decreases. This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as positivity rate decreases, irrespective of the assay specificity. Therefore, healthcare providers are encouraged to take into consideration testing results along with clinical signs and symptoms, confirmed status of any contacts, etc.
    Users of RT-PCR reagents should read the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is necessary to account for any background noise which may lead to a specimen with a high cycle threshold (Ct) value result being interpreted as a positive result. The design principle of RT-PCR means that for patients with high levels of circulating virus (viral load), relatively few cycles will be needed to detect virus and so the Ct value will be low. Conversely, when specimens return a high Ct value, it means that many cycles were required to detect virus. In some circumstances, the distinction between background noise and actual presence of the target virus is difficult to ascertain. Thus, the IFU will state how to interpret specimens at or near the limit for PCR positivity. In some cases, the IFU will state that the cut-off should be manually adjusted to ensure that specimens with high Ct values are not incorrectly assigned SARS-CoV-2 detected due to background noise.

    Report comment
  36. V I Lenin says:

    I was puzzled by the vanishing of flu and pneumonia recently ,Indolents testing theory would explain this if the test cannot distinguish between viruses that means many of the covid figures are actually flu or pneumonia ,that of course would inflate covid numbers , ,explains a lot dont you think .
    The whole Fauci Wuhan virus episode is strewn with lies and innaccuracies and damned politics . Seems the number of deaths attributed to covid are somewhat exagerated .

    Report comment
  37. John Bayley says:

    And I suspect the real fun is about to start:

    Signs of ADE from the ‘Delta’ variant in the vaccinated.

    As the recent UK figures already indicated.

    So, who’s lining up for the third ‘jab’ – like what they’re handing out in Israel now?
    Russian roulette anyone?
    Buyer remorse yet?

    Report comment
  38. Crossie says:

    Gladys is becoming more hysterical with each new press conference. Is she trying to have the flu season end before uncomfortable details come to light to people just decide they have had enough?

    Report comment
  39. win says:

    This is starting to resemble a Mary Shelley Frankenstein app. Pity some one of her ilk is not alive to day.

    Report comment
  40. Bar Beach Swimmer says:

    Last night I watched Alan Jones and he put different clips of Gladys to push home his point. Coinciding with her almost manic demeanour, how aged she’s become in 6 odd weeks.

    And on the faulty PCR test – Reiner Fuillmich’s legal case in Germany is based on that. He’s spent 12 months collecting evidence and lodged the case in the German court system on the 21/6/21.

    Report comment
  41. Kneel says:

    “And on the faulty PCR test – Reiner Fuillmich’s legal case in Germany is based on that. He’s spent 12 months collecting evidence and lodged the case in the German court system on the 21/6/21.”

    There was also a guy in Canada who caused havoc in a court case by forcing the gov to supply evidence of the virus being isolated and cultured. They don’t have that, so many restrictions being lifted there, it is reported. Don’t have all the details to hand – OAN or NewsMax or maybe even the Warroom (Alex Jones) covered it, so perhaps a pile of salt required on that front.

    Report comment
  42. rosie says:

    Canada’s conservative Alberta government is the one wanting to wind it up.

    Not some loon who got a fine.

    Report comment
  43. John Bayley says:

    Canada’s conservative Alberta government is the one wanting to wind it up.
    Not some loon who got a fine.

    How do you know those two are not related?
    Watch this interview (already referred to by Kneel above):

    Report comment
  44. Docket says:

    “ Two years of destruction built on BS testing”
    I keep going back and asking the questions, as many have above in different ways. To me it’s clear that there is a co ordinated effort on a global scale to achieve a level of ‘conditioning’ on the populace. Psychologically the repeated cycles of lockdown/freedom take a toll on everyone, and especially those that do not normally push back. you can see them in their public service jobs, or in long queues. (refer quote below)

    To what end? What IS the purpose here?

    In the research Ive done, there is clear evidence of data manipulation, clear evidence of Zero transparency from any government or agency in the reasoning behind their actions and absolutely NO accountability.

    And no, I dont see ‘voting them out at the next election’ as a viable option. The manipulation continues under a different brand.

    I see the only hope we have is in large scale individual protests, because we are individual and not everyone wants to expose themselves to a walloping by plod. I know how it CAN work, but whether enough people can be joined to do this is the real question, because only in numbers can tyranny be defeated.

    The best quote I’ve seen if from the Mateix, “..most are so hopelessly inured, so completely dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it”

    Report comment
  45. H B Bear says:

    For the record I do not intend to flounce. Anyone bothered by this can just fuck off.

    Report comment
  46. rosie says:

    No I will not watch the video.

    The loony tunes were claiming the court case proved the virus didn’t exist.

    Report comment

Comments are closed.