Madness! Infecting others isn’t a reasonable decision. Professor Prasad is doubling down on his sophism of let it rip.
Problem is Denny Lane just died because his anti vax wife convinced him not to vaccinate. 6 weeks later he suffered a horrible lung interstitial death.
You are exposing the vulnerable as if according to the professor you are doing a service?
Early COVID symptoms are often mild. The 1/10 argument Implies that this virus is equivalent to other URI’s. So if you have reason to suspect Covid no worries?
Though we see the virus immunity modulating hospitalizations it remains capable of destroying your neighbors life beyond the risk of other URI’s. So test if you have had exposure and isolate if you know you have Covid. Or not.
Virtually no one on this forum apparently believes they should be imposed upon.
You are missing a key point. IF YOU ARE SICK STAY HOME - it doesn't matter what you do or don't have. If you watched the video you'd understand that was the very first premise stated. If you test negative for covid and decide to take your mildly symptomatic self out to work and for groceries, your non-covid virus poses a threat to vulnerable people too. In fact, other viruses at this point are much more risky to vulnerable people than covid. The CDC recommendation doesn't recommend everyone stay home - it only recommends staying home if you test positive for covid. So your 1 person tests positive and stays home and the other 9 people are free to go out and spread their germs because they mistakenly believe a mask is a magical forcefield that will contain viruses.
Please give your head a shake. And no - covid isn't more capable of destroying life than any other virus. Only those who have given in to fear hysteria believe that. (and maybe have never seen a child with RSV or experienced influenza.)
Exactly. And because many at this point do not feel ill or at worst mildly ill go ahead and spread. If you are suspicious based on or previous knowledge that you are Covid positive don’t test? Rates in your area will spike so that statistic of 1 in 10 is also a bit of statistical sophism by the the professor.
I think I recognize you. You were the person wearing a mask on a beautiful sunny day out in the great outdoors who yelled profanities at my child and me for not falling into the same intellectual sinkhole that had swallowed you whole. It is you isn't it? If not, my apologies. It's just that you sound exactly like him.
Jesus Christ how the hell did people in the past ever exit a pandemic? We are going on four years into this with dodgy vaccines and little if any treatments? Humanity wouldn’t have lasted this long if we subscribed to the insane interventions we had been led to believe are ‘effective’.
No Vinay is not doubling down. Rather you are simply not living in the real world. The fact is that none of the so-called mitigation efforts (whether masking, lockdowns, 6 ft rule, etc....) had any effect whatsoever on the course of the pandemic. Indeed, in most instances mitigation was applied after the peak of a given wave had already passed and mitigation did not accelerate the downward slope. Indeed, even vaccination had next to no impact given that almost everybody by now has had Covid at least once, and interestingly most of the paxlovid rebound occurred in people who had been boosted multiple times.
The bottom line Richard is that in your state of mind perhaps you should consider living in a completely sterile bubble.
Thank you Marius for summarizing your views on mitigation. As I mentioned I am immuno compromised and I do find it thought full when friends and family test when they have concern. The party plan for the new year has been cancelled as several members discovered early based on exposure that they were positive. My 81 year old brother and his wife were exposed by a choir member at a Christmas party who had faint early symptoms and chose not to test based on her knowledge found here. 6 others were caught. They are recovering and as they were covid naive the sicker of the two, his wife took paxlovid as her PO2 was in the 80’s. They are both very fit.
We are of course at the expected point when the virus prevalence is peaking.
I occasionally mask and when I am clearly with some one who is ill. I keep fit and maintain a healthy lifestyle and as an eye surgeon I am in the face of dozens of people when I am in clinic. If they report exposure or look ill I mask. So not a bubble boy.
But I am once again entering this bubble to throw some shade on the brilliant Dr Prasand.
It is absurd to not test when you have had a known exposure and are not sick but experiencing mild early symptoms. No this is not influenza A/B or RSV which of course you should also protect others from. Having knowledge early, especially now when your likelihood of exposure is higher should not be dismissed as useless and even stupid based on the idea that you would do nothing differently. Really! You’re going to your New Year’s party singing Ole Lang knowing you are positive or with the attitude that this is good for us to spread?
Come on VP fans do you really not see the absurdity of this argument?
I think you completely missed the point. Further, it appears you don't really understand what COVID currently is.
So, the point is a very simple one: if you have symptoms of an ILI, no matter how mild, stay at home. Doesn't matter whether you test or not for COVID, for influenza A/B, RSV or any of the other viruses, because that doesn't alter treatment or consequences. COVID is not Ebola. Rather COVID is no different from any of the multitude of other viral ILIs, including influenza. And by that I mean it is no different clinically. It is not worse and it is not better. Just as one can have a severe case of influenza or a mild case of influenza. It's unpredictable, but of course advancing age + co-morbidities don't help for any viral ILI.
Richard has made it abundantly clear he’s too smart to learn. He’s repeatedly been informed that what he’s saying Prasad said is absolutely not what Prasad said. He still won’t watch the video. He’s too busy spreading influenza, RSV, and Covid when he get’s a false negative. Lol
At this point, will there ever be another New Year party?
Somebody is going to be spreading some kind of virus just as they will at every crowded restaurant. You don't see to be so immunocompromised that you haven't mounted a response to your vaccinations, so what are you going to do moving forward?
Radioisotope tracing and morphological observation demonstrated that intratracheally instilled NGO was mainly retained in the lung. NGO could result in acute lung injury (ALI) and chronic pulmonary fibrosis.
In 2019 the Company developed the QDX Ledger, which is based on technology acquired the blockchain-based technology assets of Capstan Platform, Inc. to provide an immutable, scalable and shared data store for consistent tracking and visibility among participants in a product supply chain. The identity and access credentials of participants, be they individuals, corporations or machines is also secured on the platform, providing mechanisms to control and restrict the supply of products as might be required by regulatory mandates and socially conscious business practices.
QDX Quantum Dots can be incorporated into almost any physical product so that its authenticity can be verified and tracked from point of manufacture through to sale to an end customer. Unlike existing approaches to establishing product identity, including QR code stickers and RFID tags, we believe that QDX Quantum Dots are more tamper proof, resistant to environmental extremes and low cost. We believe that they may be incorporated into products as diverse as auto parts, consumer electronics, apparel and luxury fashion accessories, industrial IoT devices, bank notes and even liquids, such as gasoline and lubricants.
In early 2020 and in the advent of the Covid 19 pandemic, the company recognized a need for a secure method for the validation and reporting of the Covid 19 testing process. The Company leveraged its existing QDX Ledger platform technology to launch the QDX HealthID later rebranded the QMC HealthID and is operated as a wholly owned subsidiary of Quantum Materials Corp.
How Quantum Dots are Produced
High volume production of QDs is typically accomplished through one of several methods including:
Colloidal synthesis: Growth of QDs from precursor compounds dissolved in solutions, much like traditional chemical processes. This manual batch process requires careful control of temperature, mixing and concentration levels of precursor materials. Precise control must be maintained uniformly throughout the solution otherwise non-uniform, irregular QDs are produced. Due to their very small size it is extremely difficult if not impossible to segregate the QDs by size once they have been produced and a conglomeration of varied size QDs are not capable of producing the unique features that are required in most applications.
Prefabricated seed growth: QDs are created from chemical precursors in the presence of a molecular cluster compound under conditions whereby the integrity of the molecular cluster is maintained and acts as a prefabricated seed template. This manual batch method can produce reasonable quantities of QDs but can take significant capital resources to achieve significant volume and still results in low yields.
QMC’s automated continuous process: Unlike the more labor-intensive batch processes described above, we use a continuous manufacturing process to produce QDs and TQDs. We Believe that this patented process and chemistry provides advantages to other methods such as more precise control of process variables which leads to improved quality control. We believe that by using this method yields are higher and manufacturing costs are lower as compared to other methods. We also believe that we are the only company to successfully deploy continuous flow technology in the large-scale manufacturing of highly uniform QDs of both cadmium-based, cadmium-free and a number of other elemental chemistries.
Raw materials for the commercial production of QD are purchased in bulk from chemical supply companies. Indium, a component of our cadmium-free QD is considered a rare metal. Indium is primarily found in South America, Canada, Australia, China and the Commonwealth of Independent States. There is also a mature and efficient indium recycling process. While our management does not believe that a supply disruption of the indium-containing compounds used in the manufacturing of QDs represents a significant risk, no assurances can be given in this regard.
Major Market Segments
Life Sciences. The life sciences industry was one of the early areas of adoption of QD technology, especially for QDs used in fluorescent markers in diagnostic applications. This includes both the in vitro use of QDs for marking (illuminating) particular cell types or metabolic processes for understanding diseases, and in vivo imaging made possible by QD fluorescence in near infrared that can be detected in deep tissues. The fluorescent qualities of QDs provide an attractive alternative to traditional organic dyes in bio-imaging. It is estimated that QDs are 20 times brighter and 100 times more stable than standard fluorescent indicators. QD technology is also being used in place of colloidal gold nanoparticles in lateral flow test kits such as those used in the rapid Covid 19 antigen test. QDs have been reported in literature to exponential improve the sensitivity of these test enabling earlier detection.
The Federal Drug Administration (“FDA”) has issued emergency use authorization (“EUA”) for medical tests that diagnose Covid-19. The FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by ensuring safety, efficacy, and security of all human and veterinary drugs, biological products, and medical devices. With regards to medical tests, the FDA usually does this by making manufacturers meet rigorous guidelines in an approval process that can take many months. During an emergency, such as a pandemic, it may not be possible to have all the evidence that the FDA would usually have before approving a medical test. If there’s evidence that strongly suggests that patients have benefited from a test, the agency can issue an EUA to make it available. One of the minimum requirements for granting EUA is that the known and potential benefits of the test outweigh the known potential risks. However, this is a minimum requirement and not the standard. The minimum standard can be met and EUA is still not given; there may be additional requirements, such as the test meeting reasonable thresholds for safety and effectiveness and/or people in urgent need of care based on a diagnosis. EUAs are only given during a declared emergency; outside of this, an EUA is never given.
Once the pandemic is over and should FDA EUA of Covid-19 tests be revoked. The 510K approval process which requires validation and submission of the test for FDA 510(k) clearance, which is one of the normally used medical device regulatory pathways for FDA approval would be required to continue to sell the test kits in the USA.
And the result has no meaning. If you have flu like symptoms, treat it, it you have oxidative stress caused by this toxicity, use antioxidants (NAC and so on)
“[in 2015] Günter Oberdörster and co-authors published what is possibly the most comprehensive review of carbon nanotube toxicology studies to date.
This study demonstrated significant differences in the type and degree of pulmonary responses to MWCNT in mice between bolus-type IT instillation and inhalation, with higher doses deposited in lung by inhalation resulting in only moderate effects compared to
severe lesions induced by instillation of lower doses. (!!!!!)
I haven’t taken one yet, I don’t see any use in starting now. The only way I would ever take one is if it would be used to determine what kind of early treatments I would receive, but even then I don’t see the need since one could prescribe ivermectin for a broad range of ailments. Unfortunately, most docs still won’t touch ivermectin thanks to all the politics and misinformation, and even if they do the pharmacists decided to act as gatekeepers again, so what’s the point of taking their stupid tests? To me, if anyone is still taking covid tests, and if they’re still wearing masks, there’s zero hope for them.
Li et al. (2007a) compared the pulmonary response of mice exposed to purified MWCNT by IT instillation versus inhalation.
Intratracheal instillation produced inflammation and severe destruction of alveolar structures, while inhalation predominately resulted in moderate pathology consisting of alveolar wall thickening and cell proliferation but general alveolar structure was retained. This study demonstrated significant differences in the type and degree of pulmonary responses to MWCNT in mice between bolus-type IT instillation and inhalation, with higher doses deposited in lung by inhalation resulting in only moderate effects compared to severe lesions induced by instillation of lower doses. (!!!!!)
“A recent study of particular objects known as "nanotubes," revered for their extraordinary strength and electrical conductivity, demonstrated that such objects tend to clump within the lungs, causing suffocation.”
“Take the experience of researchers at DuPont, who are testing microscopic tubes of carbon, known as nanotubes, valued for their extraordinary strength and electrical conductivity.
When the researchers injected nanotubes into the lungs of rats in the summer of 2002, the animals unexpectedly began gasping for breath. Fifteen percent of them quickly died. ''It was the highest death rate we had ever seen,''
said David B. Warheit, the research leader, who began his career studying asbestos and has been testing the pulmonary effects of various chemicals for DuPont since 1984.
Early research has raised troubling issues. DuPont and others, for example, found evidence that the cells that break down foreign particles in rodent lungs have more trouble detecting and handling nanoparticles than larger particles that have long been studied by air pollution experts.
Lungs are not the only concern.
Research shows that nanoparticles deposited in the nose can make their way directly into the brain.
They can also change shape as they move from liquid solutions to the air, making it harder to draw general conclusions about their potential impact on living things. “
The best thing to come out of all of this is that people finally decided to stay home when sick in general. 7-8 years ago I had a coworker stroll into the office and tell us she’d thrown up multiple times that morning and “felt like crap”. My other coworker at the time came with pink eye and we all avoided her like the plague. One girl who reported to me came to work very obviously feverish and miserable and I sent her home immediately (she had the flu). Now? Just an excuse to work from home, it’s rare to see anyone sick at work.
Sadly this trend is over. Thanks in part to public “health” telling everyone that masks are magic. Now every day I get sick people coming in to my dental office. They think that hiding their smile makes it all okay. And we’ve been very clear that we’re doing elective procedures; if you are sick just call and reschedule. No penalty. They’ve been convinced that they don’t need to, courtesy of our tax dollars.
Yeah that is true too. Though I do feel that anyone wearing a mask is immediately looked at suspiciously if they aren’t a consistent mask wearer (obviously they’re sick, not trying to avoid sickness) (maybe because I’m in a red state). I had a major surgery done when I had a minor cold (dr knew, said it was fine since it was only a head cold) it made recovery worse and I didn’t particularly enjoy it. I don’t understand how people don’t want to reschedule an elective one for when they’re better, just a better option all around!
You are bang on. I'm a Paramedic that covers a one of the busiest airports in North America. Just this past week I was called for a 23 y/o female returning form a southern tropical vacation. While there she fell ill with fever, cough, aches and pains. The day before they departed (4 days since onset of symptoms) she went to a local physician who administered a 'rapid covid test' of which came back negative. She was treated with steroids and inhalers and told to 'not say anything and fly home tomorrow and go to the hospital when you return' (oh ya, he told her she may also have a partial collapsed lung but we won't even go there) So she and her husband boarded a multi hour flight in no better a condition than when she saw the physician. When she arrived at our airport we were called. We found her sitting in a wheel chair without a mask. I asked the obvious question "why did you get on an airplane when you were so sick, coughing with wheezing and congestion, and since you did, did you by chance at least wear a mask?' And I bet you can guess, her response was 'no because I tested negative for Covid'. This is only one example of the many people we are called to assist in public places with respiratory flu like symptoms who when we ask why did you go out, they said "because I took the test and it was negative' . This is observational only, but pretty much n line with your video. All the best in 2024.
Begging again. It would not be much work to run these podcasts through an autotranscriber (they are cheap/free) so those of us that must use eyes can get the wisdom as well. Many other sites do and it is always most appreciated. Many thanks.
Agree. That is how we treat the flu and other diseases. However, your Institution UCSF, will disagreee and are about to re-institute masking again. The bottom line is this. None of this is really good science or good medicine. How did we treat epidemics or pandemics in the past? The various flu epidemics in the past? We treated this sensibly. If sick, stay home. Virtually everyone I see with Covid, has been multiply vaccinated -- recently.
Don’t you find it interesting that in the 12th century science was corrupted by religion and now it is corrupted by politics. The former born of ignorance and the latter by greed!
This is excellent! I've worked in and around medicine for over 40 years. Our medical community has been deceived brought into the woke through our depraved educational system run and managed by depraved people and that is why we have what we have. Just think, many hospitals are bringing back masking and I ask for what purpose! Thank you for your common logical sense and showing the truth. I agree, sooner or later the truth will come out and people will have to acknowledge that the emperor has no cloths! I hope and pray that it will come sooner than later and that there will be consequences for those who have propigated this wicked madness!
No freaking way. The is NO standardized test for covid. PCR is a ruse and most home kits are made in China. If you trust that, you are moving closer to your demise.
As always Vinay is spot on and presents the common sense approach. Of course if one feels ill stay at home. That's all that ever needed doing during the entire covid episode. There is no point in testing for any ILI (including Covid and influenza) unless it is going to affect treatment. Some may say "but in covid with have paxlovid." But paxlovid is next to useless for anybody who has had covid prior, who has been vaccinated and is not at high risk. Perhaps the better approach for any viral ILI is to watch carefully for the presence of secondary bacterial pneumonia, the real killer, and treat accordingly with antibiotics.
Is it my understanding that you can spread C19 without being symptomatic? I always thought you had to be symptomatic to spread the cold, flu etc - is C19 that different? Please explain thanks. Being subjected to problematic testing regimes and PCR's also muddies the water!
JAMA published a few meta analyses and showed asymptomatic spread is really rare. But then the CDC published a “study” showing 50% of spread was from asymptomatic patients. Their study, though, was just a computer model that assumed asymptomatic patients were nearly as contagious as symptomatic. Which is a comically bad way to design a “study” -- to just declare your desired outcome and then show that if you assume their desired outcome, then their desired outcome is true.
Exactly. The truth, of course, is that SARS-CoV2 is not going to behave any differently from any other coronavirus or the innumerable other viruses that cause ILIs. To spread the virus one needs to have a high viral load and that automatically means that one is going to be symptomatic. Now is it possible, on some very rare occasion, that somebody with a low viral load who has minimal symptoms (e.g. pre-symptomatic) could infect somebody else; sure but this will be rare as shown in the JAMA meta analyses.
Pretty much do the opposite of the CDC in regards to Covid.
Madness! Infecting others isn’t a reasonable decision. Professor Prasad is doubling down on his sophism of let it rip.
Problem is Denny Lane just died because his anti vax wife convinced him not to vaccinate. 6 weeks later he suffered a horrible lung interstitial death.
You are exposing the vulnerable as if according to the professor you are doing a service?
Looks like someone didn’t watch the video. Lol
Early COVID symptoms are often mild. The 1/10 argument Implies that this virus is equivalent to other URI’s. So if you have reason to suspect Covid no worries?
Though we see the virus immunity modulating hospitalizations it remains capable of destroying your neighbors life beyond the risk of other URI’s. So test if you have had exposure and isolate if you know you have Covid. Or not.
Virtually no one on this forum apparently believes they should be imposed upon.
You are missing a key point. IF YOU ARE SICK STAY HOME - it doesn't matter what you do or don't have. If you watched the video you'd understand that was the very first premise stated. If you test negative for covid and decide to take your mildly symptomatic self out to work and for groceries, your non-covid virus poses a threat to vulnerable people too. In fact, other viruses at this point are much more risky to vulnerable people than covid. The CDC recommendation doesn't recommend everyone stay home - it only recommends staying home if you test positive for covid. So your 1 person tests positive and stays home and the other 9 people are free to go out and spread their germs because they mistakenly believe a mask is a magical forcefield that will contain viruses.
Please give your head a shake. And no - covid isn't more capable of destroying life than any other virus. Only those who have given in to fear hysteria believe that. (and maybe have never seen a child with RSV or experienced influenza.)
Exactly. And because many at this point do not feel ill or at worst mildly ill go ahead and spread. If you are suspicious based on or previous knowledge that you are Covid positive don’t test? Rates in your area will spike so that statistic of 1 in 10 is also a bit of statistical sophism by the the professor.
Seriously how hard is it to swab your nose?
Typhoid Mary was completely asymptomatic.
I think I recognize you. You were the person wearing a mask on a beautiful sunny day out in the great outdoors who yelled profanities at my child and me for not falling into the same intellectual sinkhole that had swallowed you whole. It is you isn't it? If not, my apologies. It's just that you sound exactly like him.
Jesus Christ how the hell did people in the past ever exit a pandemic? We are going on four years into this with dodgy vaccines and little if any treatments? Humanity wouldn’t have lasted this long if we subscribed to the insane interventions we had been led to believe are ‘effective’.
No Vinay is not doubling down. Rather you are simply not living in the real world. The fact is that none of the so-called mitigation efforts (whether masking, lockdowns, 6 ft rule, etc....) had any effect whatsoever on the course of the pandemic. Indeed, in most instances mitigation was applied after the peak of a given wave had already passed and mitigation did not accelerate the downward slope. Indeed, even vaccination had next to no impact given that almost everybody by now has had Covid at least once, and interestingly most of the paxlovid rebound occurred in people who had been boosted multiple times.
The bottom line Richard is that in your state of mind perhaps you should consider living in a completely sterile bubble.
Thank you Marius for summarizing your views on mitigation. As I mentioned I am immuno compromised and I do find it thought full when friends and family test when they have concern. The party plan for the new year has been cancelled as several members discovered early based on exposure that they were positive. My 81 year old brother and his wife were exposed by a choir member at a Christmas party who had faint early symptoms and chose not to test based on her knowledge found here. 6 others were caught. They are recovering and as they were covid naive the sicker of the two, his wife took paxlovid as her PO2 was in the 80’s. They are both very fit.
We are of course at the expected point when the virus prevalence is peaking.
I occasionally mask and when I am clearly with some one who is ill. I keep fit and maintain a healthy lifestyle and as an eye surgeon I am in the face of dozens of people when I am in clinic. If they report exposure or look ill I mask. So not a bubble boy.
But I am once again entering this bubble to throw some shade on the brilliant Dr Prasand.
It is absurd to not test when you have had a known exposure and are not sick but experiencing mild early symptoms. No this is not influenza A/B or RSV which of course you should also protect others from. Having knowledge early, especially now when your likelihood of exposure is higher should not be dismissed as useless and even stupid based on the idea that you would do nothing differently. Really! You’re going to your New Year’s party singing Ole Lang knowing you are positive or with the attitude that this is good for us to spread?
Come on VP fans do you really not see the absurdity of this argument?
A 15 minute minute kindness?
I think you completely missed the point. Further, it appears you don't really understand what COVID currently is.
So, the point is a very simple one: if you have symptoms of an ILI, no matter how mild, stay at home. Doesn't matter whether you test or not for COVID, for influenza A/B, RSV or any of the other viruses, because that doesn't alter treatment or consequences. COVID is not Ebola. Rather COVID is no different from any of the multitude of other viral ILIs, including influenza. And by that I mean it is no different clinically. It is not worse and it is not better. Just as one can have a severe case of influenza or a mild case of influenza. It's unpredictable, but of course advancing age + co-morbidities don't help for any viral ILI.
Richard has made it abundantly clear he’s too smart to learn. He’s repeatedly been informed that what he’s saying Prasad said is absolutely not what Prasad said. He still won’t watch the video. He’s too busy spreading influenza, RSV, and Covid when he get’s a false negative. Lol
“No this is not influenza A/B or RSV which of course you should also protect others from. “
So you actually agree with Dr. Prasand’s position. If you are sick, don’t infect other people.
At this point, will there ever be another New Year party?
Somebody is going to be spreading some kind of virus just as they will at every crowded restaurant. You don't see to be so immunocompromised that you haven't mounted a response to your vaccinations, so what are you going to do moving forward?
What "Covid" and what "test"?
https://outraged.substack.com/p/evidence-of-crimes-against-humanity
GRAPHENE/NANOTECHNOLOGY IN PCR TESTS
https://www.nature.com/articles/am20137#MOESM2 Biodistribution and pulmonary toxicity of intratracheally instilled graphene oxide in mice | NPG Asia Materials (nature.com)
Radioisotope tracing and morphological observation demonstrated that intratracheally instilled NGO was mainly retained in the lung. NGO could result in acute lung injury (ALI) and chronic pulmonary fibrosis.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1403570/000149315221010243/form10-q.htm#V_009
In 2019 the Company developed the QDX Ledger, which is based on technology acquired the blockchain-based technology assets of Capstan Platform, Inc. to provide an immutable, scalable and shared data store for consistent tracking and visibility among participants in a product supply chain. The identity and access credentials of participants, be they individuals, corporations or machines is also secured on the platform, providing mechanisms to control and restrict the supply of products as might be required by regulatory mandates and socially conscious business practices.
QDX Quantum Dots can be incorporated into almost any physical product so that its authenticity can be verified and tracked from point of manufacture through to sale to an end customer. Unlike existing approaches to establishing product identity, including QR code stickers and RFID tags, we believe that QDX Quantum Dots are more tamper proof, resistant to environmental extremes and low cost. We believe that they may be incorporated into products as diverse as auto parts, consumer electronics, apparel and luxury fashion accessories, industrial IoT devices, bank notes and even liquids, such as gasoline and lubricants.
In early 2020 and in the advent of the Covid 19 pandemic, the company recognized a need for a secure method for the validation and reporting of the Covid 19 testing process. The Company leveraged its existing QDX Ledger platform technology to launch the QDX HealthID later rebranded the QMC HealthID and is operated as a wholly owned subsidiary of Quantum Materials Corp.
How Quantum Dots are Produced
High volume production of QDs is typically accomplished through one of several methods including:
Colloidal synthesis: Growth of QDs from precursor compounds dissolved in solutions, much like traditional chemical processes. This manual batch process requires careful control of temperature, mixing and concentration levels of precursor materials. Precise control must be maintained uniformly throughout the solution otherwise non-uniform, irregular QDs are produced. Due to their very small size it is extremely difficult if not impossible to segregate the QDs by size once they have been produced and a conglomeration of varied size QDs are not capable of producing the unique features that are required in most applications.
Prefabricated seed growth: QDs are created from chemical precursors in the presence of a molecular cluster compound under conditions whereby the integrity of the molecular cluster is maintained and acts as a prefabricated seed template. This manual batch method can produce reasonable quantities of QDs but can take significant capital resources to achieve significant volume and still results in low yields.
QMC’s automated continuous process: Unlike the more labor-intensive batch processes described above, we use a continuous manufacturing process to produce QDs and TQDs. We Believe that this patented process and chemistry provides advantages to other methods such as more precise control of process variables which leads to improved quality control. We believe that by using this method yields are higher and manufacturing costs are lower as compared to other methods. We also believe that we are the only company to successfully deploy continuous flow technology in the large-scale manufacturing of highly uniform QDs of both cadmium-based, cadmium-free and a number of other elemental chemistries.
Raw materials for the commercial production of QD are purchased in bulk from chemical supply companies. Indium, a component of our cadmium-free QD is considered a rare metal. Indium is primarily found in South America, Canada, Australia, China and the Commonwealth of Independent States. There is also a mature and efficient indium recycling process. While our management does not believe that a supply disruption of the indium-containing compounds used in the manufacturing of QDs represents a significant risk, no assurances can be given in this regard.
Major Market Segments
Life Sciences. The life sciences industry was one of the early areas of adoption of QD technology, especially for QDs used in fluorescent markers in diagnostic applications. This includes both the in vitro use of QDs for marking (illuminating) particular cell types or metabolic processes for understanding diseases, and in vivo imaging made possible by QD fluorescence in near infrared that can be detected in deep tissues. The fluorescent qualities of QDs provide an attractive alternative to traditional organic dyes in bio-imaging. It is estimated that QDs are 20 times brighter and 100 times more stable than standard fluorescent indicators. QD technology is also being used in place of colloidal gold nanoparticles in lateral flow test kits such as those used in the rapid Covid 19 antigen test. QDs have been reported in literature to exponential improve the sensitivity of these test enabling earlier detection.
The Federal Drug Administration (“FDA”) has issued emergency use authorization (“EUA”) for medical tests that diagnose Covid-19. The FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by ensuring safety, efficacy, and security of all human and veterinary drugs, biological products, and medical devices. With regards to medical tests, the FDA usually does this by making manufacturers meet rigorous guidelines in an approval process that can take many months. During an emergency, such as a pandemic, it may not be possible to have all the evidence that the FDA would usually have before approving a medical test. If there’s evidence that strongly suggests that patients have benefited from a test, the agency can issue an EUA to make it available. One of the minimum requirements for granting EUA is that the known and potential benefits of the test outweigh the known potential risks. However, this is a minimum requirement and not the standard. The minimum standard can be met and EUA is still not given; there may be additional requirements, such as the test meeting reasonable thresholds for safety and effectiveness and/or people in urgent need of care based on a diagnosis. EUAs are only given during a declared emergency; outside of this, an EUA is never given.
Once the pandemic is over and should FDA EUA of Covid-19 tests be revoked. The 510K approval process which requires validation and submission of the test for FDA 510(k) clearance, which is one of the normally used medical device regulatory pathways for FDA approval would be required to continue to sell the test kits in the USA.
So I think your saying testing is dangerous because of the EUA status OH?
Because it is toxic. These PCR swabs are toxic.
And the result has no meaning. If you have flu like symptoms, treat it, it you have oxidative stress caused by this toxicity, use antioxidants (NAC and so on)
OH do you have a link that discusses the swab fibers? Rayon fibers are coated?
Many links in these posts:
https://outraged.substack.com/p/quantum-dots-pcr-tests
“[in 2015] Günter Oberdörster and co-authors published what is possibly the most comprehensive review of carbon nanotube toxicology studies to date.
This study demonstrated significant differences in the type and degree of pulmonary responses to MWCNT in mice between bolus-type IT instillation and inhalation, with higher doses deposited in lung by inhalation resulting in only moderate effects compared to
severe lesions induced by instillation of lower doses. (!!!!!)
INSTILLATION!!!
https://outraged.substack.com/p/stop-quantum-tagging
https://outraged.substack.com/p/evidence-of-crimes-against-humanity
I haven’t taken one yet, I don’t see any use in starting now. The only way I would ever take one is if it would be used to determine what kind of early treatments I would receive, but even then I don’t see the need since one could prescribe ivermectin for a broad range of ailments. Unfortunately, most docs still won’t touch ivermectin thanks to all the politics and misinformation, and even if they do the pharmacists decided to act as gatekeepers again, so what’s the point of taking their stupid tests? To me, if anyone is still taking covid tests, and if they’re still wearing masks, there’s zero hope for them.
Good for you, it is EXTREMELY TOXIC and a piece of garbage
https://outraged.substack.com/p/thats-what-covid-is
Li et al. (2007a) compared the pulmonary response of mice exposed to purified MWCNT by IT instillation versus inhalation.
Intratracheal instillation produced inflammation and severe destruction of alveolar structures, while inhalation predominately resulted in moderate pathology consisting of alveolar wall thickening and cell proliferation but general alveolar structure was retained. This study demonstrated significant differences in the type and degree of pulmonary responses to MWCNT in mice between bolus-type IT instillation and inhalation, with higher doses deposited in lung by inhalation resulting in only moderate effects compared to severe lesions induced by instillation of lower doses. (!!!!!)
“A recent study of particular objects known as "nanotubes," revered for their extraordinary strength and electrical conductivity, demonstrated that such objects tend to clump within the lungs, causing suffocation.”
https://lawcat.berkeley.edu/record/1119251 Is Nanotechnology Prohibited by the Biological and Chemical Weapons Conventions
“Take the experience of researchers at DuPont, who are testing microscopic tubes of carbon, known as nanotubes, valued for their extraordinary strength and electrical conductivity.
When the researchers injected nanotubes into the lungs of rats in the summer of 2002, the animals unexpectedly began gasping for breath. Fifteen percent of them quickly died. ''It was the highest death rate we had ever seen,''
said David B. Warheit, the research leader, who began his career studying asbestos and has been testing the pulmonary effects of various chemicals for DuPont since 1984.
Early research has raised troubling issues. DuPont and others, for example, found evidence that the cells that break down foreign particles in rodent lungs have more trouble detecting and handling nanoparticles than larger particles that have long been studied by air pollution experts.
Lungs are not the only concern.
Research shows that nanoparticles deposited in the nose can make their way directly into the brain.
They can also change shape as they move from liquid solutions to the air, making it harder to draw general conclusions about their potential impact on living things. “
https://www.azonano.com/news.aspx?newsID=37676 Using a Graphene-Based Electrochemical Sensor to Detect COVID-19 in Under Five Minutes (azonano.com)
https://www.biospace.com/article/new-graphene-chemo-phononic-test-for-sars-cov-2-may-challenge-pcr-assays/
https://www.nsmedicaldevices.com/news/graphene-sensor-covid-19-test/
https://outraged.substack.com/p/bill-gates-is-a-pcr-test-fortune
https://rumble.com/vo8v3f-nasal-swabs-for-pcr-tests-are-higly-dangerous-.html
No do not comply, period
Nothing is gained for you or us.
That's what I've said for years; figure out how to encourage people to stay home when they're sick...
Especially, when coughing and sneezing. Also, provide incentives and education for effective self-care and enhancing our own immune system.
The best thing to come out of all of this is that people finally decided to stay home when sick in general. 7-8 years ago I had a coworker stroll into the office and tell us she’d thrown up multiple times that morning and “felt like crap”. My other coworker at the time came with pink eye and we all avoided her like the plague. One girl who reported to me came to work very obviously feverish and miserable and I sent her home immediately (she had the flu). Now? Just an excuse to work from home, it’s rare to see anyone sick at work.
Sadly this trend is over. Thanks in part to public “health” telling everyone that masks are magic. Now every day I get sick people coming in to my dental office. They think that hiding their smile makes it all okay. And we’ve been very clear that we’re doing elective procedures; if you are sick just call and reschedule. No penalty. They’ve been convinced that they don’t need to, courtesy of our tax dollars.
Yeah that is true too. Though I do feel that anyone wearing a mask is immediately looked at suspiciously if they aren’t a consistent mask wearer (obviously they’re sick, not trying to avoid sickness) (maybe because I’m in a red state). I had a major surgery done when I had a minor cold (dr knew, said it was fine since it was only a head cold) it made recovery worse and I didn’t particularly enjoy it. I don’t understand how people don’t want to reschedule an elective one for when they’re better, just a better option all around!
You are bang on. I'm a Paramedic that covers a one of the busiest airports in North America. Just this past week I was called for a 23 y/o female returning form a southern tropical vacation. While there she fell ill with fever, cough, aches and pains. The day before they departed (4 days since onset of symptoms) she went to a local physician who administered a 'rapid covid test' of which came back negative. She was treated with steroids and inhalers and told to 'not say anything and fly home tomorrow and go to the hospital when you return' (oh ya, he told her she may also have a partial collapsed lung but we won't even go there) So she and her husband boarded a multi hour flight in no better a condition than when she saw the physician. When she arrived at our airport we were called. We found her sitting in a wheel chair without a mask. I asked the obvious question "why did you get on an airplane when you were so sick, coughing with wheezing and congestion, and since you did, did you by chance at least wear a mask?' And I bet you can guess, her response was 'no because I tested negative for Covid'. This is only one example of the many people we are called to assist in public places with respiratory flu like symptoms who when we ask why did you go out, they said "because I took the test and it was negative' . This is observational only, but pretty much n line with your video. All the best in 2024.
Thank you V❤️
Begging again. It would not be much work to run these podcasts through an autotranscriber (they are cheap/free) so those of us that must use eyes can get the wisdom as well. Many other sites do and it is always most appreciated. Many thanks.
Dr. K, this, like many of Dr. Prasad's posts, are available in many platforms. Turning on Youtube's Close Captioning achieves your desired result.
Agree. That is how we treat the flu and other diseases. However, your Institution UCSF, will disagreee and are about to re-institute masking again. The bottom line is this. None of this is really good science or good medicine. How did we treat epidemics or pandemics in the past? The various flu epidemics in the past? We treated this sensibly. If sick, stay home. Virtually everyone I see with Covid, has been multiply vaccinated -- recently.
Excellent, Vinay! Thank you!!
Don’t you find it interesting that in the 12th century science was corrupted by religion and now it is corrupted by politics. The former born of ignorance and the latter by greed!
This is excellent! I've worked in and around medicine for over 40 years. Our medical community has been deceived brought into the woke through our depraved educational system run and managed by depraved people and that is why we have what we have. Just think, many hospitals are bringing back masking and I ask for what purpose! Thank you for your common logical sense and showing the truth. I agree, sooner or later the truth will come out and people will have to acknowledge that the emperor has no cloths! I hope and pray that it will come sooner than later and that there will be consequences for those who have propigated this wicked madness!
Amen.
Try hcc c
No do not comply
No freaking way. The is NO standardized test for covid. PCR is a ruse and most home kits are made in China. If you trust that, you are moving closer to your demise.
As always Vinay is spot on and presents the common sense approach. Of course if one feels ill stay at home. That's all that ever needed doing during the entire covid episode. There is no point in testing for any ILI (including Covid and influenza) unless it is going to affect treatment. Some may say "but in covid with have paxlovid." But paxlovid is next to useless for anybody who has had covid prior, who has been vaccinated and is not at high risk. Perhaps the better approach for any viral ILI is to watch carefully for the presence of secondary bacterial pneumonia, the real killer, and treat accordingly with antibiotics.
Is it my understanding that you can spread C19 without being symptomatic? I always thought you had to be symptomatic to spread the cold, flu etc - is C19 that different? Please explain thanks. Being subjected to problematic testing regimes and PCR's also muddies the water!
JAMA published a few meta analyses and showed asymptomatic spread is really rare. But then the CDC published a “study” showing 50% of spread was from asymptomatic patients. Their study, though, was just a computer model that assumed asymptomatic patients were nearly as contagious as symptomatic. Which is a comically bad way to design a “study” -- to just declare your desired outcome and then show that if you assume their desired outcome, then their desired outcome is true.
Exactly. The truth, of course, is that SARS-CoV2 is not going to behave any differently from any other coronavirus or the innumerable other viruses that cause ILIs. To spread the virus one needs to have a high viral load and that automatically means that one is going to be symptomatic. Now is it possible, on some very rare occasion, that somebody with a low viral load who has minimal symptoms (e.g. pre-symptomatic) could infect somebody else; sure but this will be rare as shown in the JAMA meta analyses.