外泌体在 COVID-19 PCR 检测假阳性中的作用:SARS-CoV-2-RNA体内检测的非特异性解释了大流行后的人为峰值

Khmelinskii Igor, Stallinga Peter, Woodcock Leslie V
{"title":"外泌体在 COVID-19 PCR 检测假阳性中的作用:SARS-CoV-2-RNA体内检测的非特异性解释了大流行后的人为峰值","authors":"Khmelinskii Igor, Stallinga Peter, Woodcock Leslie V","doi":"10.17352/2455-5282.000179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The COVID-19 pandemic priorities have focused on prevention by detection and response. National governments’ prevention response decisions are based upon detection statistics from PCR (polymerase chain reaction) tests that are used to define numbers of (i) COVID-19 infected persons, (ii) COVID-19 hospitalisations, and (iii) COVID-19 deaths. These statistics assume a priori that PCR tests are nigh 100% true detectors of COVID-19 infections. Here we will provide an alternative interpretation, along with the compelling evidence, that false positives have distorted to some degree the statistics of the primary outbreaks, and account for almost the whole of the 2nd and subsequent apparent COVID-19 outbreak peaks in various countries. Methods: We extract from the published literature on PCR-test outcomes graphical data that reveals the evidence for a very large percentage of false positive results. We review the role of exosomes in the immune response to all respiratory viral infections and its effect on PCR tests. We hypothesise that exosomes, triggered by all viral respiratory infections, are largely responsible for positive outcomes from PCR tests for COVID-19. We test our alternative interpretation for consistency with the empirical epidemiological trends as published by the World Health Organization (WHO). The Scientific Method is used to direct our research efforts. Findings: We find that PCR testing data for the second and following waves of the COVID-19 pandemic indicate that these waves are mainly artefacts of false-positive results. We find that this interpretation provides a more consistent explanation of the known epidemiology of COVID-19 than the hitherto consensus notion of extremely contagious and rapidly mutating viruses. Interpretation: The RNA (ribonucleic acid) code detected in PCR tests, previously attributed to SARS-CoV-2, belongs instead to a respiratory-virus-induced immune system response by human cells that liberate exosomes, and that vitiate PCR test results. PCR tests have zero specificity in vivo due to the exosome RNA. PCR tests exhibit excellent specificity in vitro on pure samples of other respiratory viruses. The low success rate of vaccines in preventing COVID-19 is explained by the inexact identification of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA.","PeriodicalId":389545,"journal":{"name":"Global Journal of Medical and Clinical Case Reports","volume":"63 14","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Role of exosomes in false-positive COVID-19 PCR tests: Non-specificity of SARS-CoV-2-RNA in vivo detection explains artificial post-pandemic peaks\",\"authors\":\"Khmelinskii Igor, Stallinga Peter, Woodcock Leslie V\",\"doi\":\"10.17352/2455-5282.000179\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The COVID-19 pandemic priorities have focused on prevention by detection and response. National governments’ prevention response decisions are based upon detection statistics from PCR (polymerase chain reaction) tests that are used to define numbers of (i) COVID-19 infected persons, (ii) COVID-19 hospitalisations, and (iii) COVID-19 deaths. These statistics assume a priori that PCR tests are nigh 100% true detectors of COVID-19 infections. Here we will provide an alternative interpretation, along with the compelling evidence, that false positives have distorted to some degree the statistics of the primary outbreaks, and account for almost the whole of the 2nd and subsequent apparent COVID-19 outbreak peaks in various countries. Methods: We extract from the published literature on PCR-test outcomes graphical data that reveals the evidence for a very large percentage of false positive results. We review the role of exosomes in the immune response to all respiratory viral infections and its effect on PCR tests. We hypothesise that exosomes, triggered by all viral respiratory infections, are largely responsible for positive outcomes from PCR tests for COVID-19. We test our alternative interpretation for consistency with the empirical epidemiological trends as published by the World Health Organization (WHO). The Scientific Method is used to direct our research efforts. Findings: We find that PCR testing data for the second and following waves of the COVID-19 pandemic indicate that these waves are mainly artefacts of false-positive results. We find that this interpretation provides a more consistent explanation of the known epidemiology of COVID-19 than the hitherto consensus notion of extremely contagious and rapidly mutating viruses. Interpretation: The RNA (ribonucleic acid) code detected in PCR tests, previously attributed to SARS-CoV-2, belongs instead to a respiratory-virus-induced immune system response by human cells that liberate exosomes, and that vitiate PCR test results. PCR tests have zero specificity in vivo due to the exosome RNA. PCR tests exhibit excellent specificity in vitro on pure samples of other respiratory viruses. The low success rate of vaccines in preventing COVID-19 is explained by the inexact identification of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA.\",\"PeriodicalId\":389545,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Journal of Medical and Clinical Case Reports\",\"volume\":\"63 14\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Journal of Medical and Clinical Case Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17352/2455-5282.000179\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Journal of Medical and Clinical Case Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17352/2455-5282.000179","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:COVID-19 大流行的优先重点是通过检测和响应进行预防。各国政府的预防应对决策基于 PCR(聚合酶链反应)检测的检测统计数据,这些数据用于确定(i) COVID-19 感染者人数、(ii) COVID-19 住院人数和(iii) COVID-19 死亡人数。这些统计数据先验地假定 PCR 检测对 COVID-19 感染的检测几乎是 100% 真实的。在此,我们将提供另一种解释以及令人信服的证据,即假阳性在一定程度上歪曲了原发疫情的统计数据,几乎是各国第二次及随后明显的 COVID-19 疫情高峰的全部原因。方法:我们从已发表的有关 PCR 检测结果的文献中提取了图表数据,这些数据揭示了假阳性结果所占比例非常大的证据。我们回顾了外泌体在所有呼吸道病毒感染的免疫反应中的作用及其对 PCR 检测的影响。我们假设所有呼吸道病毒感染引发的外泌体是 COVID-19 PCR 检测结果呈阳性的主要原因。我们检验了我们的替代解释是否与世界卫生组织(WHO)公布的经验流行病学趋势一致。我们采用科学方法指导我们的研究工作。研究结果:我们发现,COVID-19 大流行的第二波和随后几波的 PCR 检测数据表明,这几波主要是假阳性结果的假象。我们发现,与迄今达成共识的传染性极强、变异迅速的病毒概念相比,这种解释为 COVID-19 的已知流行病学提供了更一致的解释。解释:在 PCR 检测中检测到的核糖核酸(RNA)代码以前被认为是 SARS-CoV-2 的代码,但它属于呼吸道病毒引起的人体细胞免疫系统反应,这种反应释放出外泌体,使 PCR 检测结果失效。由于外泌体 RNA 的存在,PCR 检测在体内的特异性为零。而在体外对其他呼吸道病毒的纯样本进行 PCR 检测时,其特异性非常好。疫苗在预防 COVID-19 方面的成功率很低,这是因为对 SARS-CoV-2 RNA 的识别不准确。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Role of exosomes in false-positive COVID-19 PCR tests: Non-specificity of SARS-CoV-2-RNA in vivo detection explains artificial post-pandemic peaks
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic priorities have focused on prevention by detection and response. National governments’ prevention response decisions are based upon detection statistics from PCR (polymerase chain reaction) tests that are used to define numbers of (i) COVID-19 infected persons, (ii) COVID-19 hospitalisations, and (iii) COVID-19 deaths. These statistics assume a priori that PCR tests are nigh 100% true detectors of COVID-19 infections. Here we will provide an alternative interpretation, along with the compelling evidence, that false positives have distorted to some degree the statistics of the primary outbreaks, and account for almost the whole of the 2nd and subsequent apparent COVID-19 outbreak peaks in various countries. Methods: We extract from the published literature on PCR-test outcomes graphical data that reveals the evidence for a very large percentage of false positive results. We review the role of exosomes in the immune response to all respiratory viral infections and its effect on PCR tests. We hypothesise that exosomes, triggered by all viral respiratory infections, are largely responsible for positive outcomes from PCR tests for COVID-19. We test our alternative interpretation for consistency with the empirical epidemiological trends as published by the World Health Organization (WHO). The Scientific Method is used to direct our research efforts. Findings: We find that PCR testing data for the second and following waves of the COVID-19 pandemic indicate that these waves are mainly artefacts of false-positive results. We find that this interpretation provides a more consistent explanation of the known epidemiology of COVID-19 than the hitherto consensus notion of extremely contagious and rapidly mutating viruses. Interpretation: The RNA (ribonucleic acid) code detected in PCR tests, previously attributed to SARS-CoV-2, belongs instead to a respiratory-virus-induced immune system response by human cells that liberate exosomes, and that vitiate PCR test results. PCR tests have zero specificity in vivo due to the exosome RNA. PCR tests exhibit excellent specificity in vitro on pure samples of other respiratory viruses. The low success rate of vaccines in preventing COVID-19 is explained by the inexact identification of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信