Vaccinated people who then test positive for COVID; the wave is building

by Jon Rappoport

January 11, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

An alert reader pointed me to a key statement in a document published by OraSure Technologies, a manufacturer of a rapid COVID test. The document is posted on an FDA web page.

It is titled, “IntellSwab COVID-19 Rapid Test—Healthcare Provider Instructions for Use.”

The key quote occurs in a section headlined, Limitations of the Test:

“Potential cross reactivity of the InteliSwab™ COVID-19 Rapid Test with COVID-19 vaccines or therapeutics has not been evaluated.”

In the medical community, the term “cross reactivity” is universally understood. It means: a test designed to detect whether X is present in a person’s body is, in fact, detecting Y, an entirely irrelevant item, BUT is mistakenly calling it X.

For example, a person had three drinks the night before his test, and the test then came up positive for the presence of a germ, when actually the test was reacting to the alcohol in the drinks.

And in this document I just quoted, the manufacturer readily admits it hasn’t looked into the possibility that the COVID test is reacting to the COVID VACCINE and then mistakenly stating the vaccinated person has THE VIRUS in his body.

So the question is: why hasn’t the manufacturer looked into this cross reactivity issue? The document shows tests for all sorts of other possible cross reactivity.

And the next question is: how can the FDA grant emergency use authorization for this rapid test, when cross reactivity with the vaccine hasn’t been explored?

The manufacturer clearly understands that cross reactivity with the vaccine is a possibility; otherwise they wouldn’t have mentioned it.

Consider this scenario: a person takes the COVID vaccine. He can now go back to work at his office. But his boss wants all employees to keep getting tested. Three weeks later, the vaccinated person takes the test—and because the test DOES cross react with the vaccine, he’s told he’s positive. He has to go home. If he has a cough or a sniffle, he might end up at the doctor, who might direct him to the hospital. At that point, all bets are off. Who knows what highly dangerous and life-threatening treatments (e.g., a breathing ventilator) the hospital might impose—especially since the hospital is receiving federal money for both the diagnosis and treatment of every COVID patient.

In this article, I’m not trying to explain why the test could cross react with the vaccine. All sorts of educated speculations are possible. I’m simply pointing out the existence of rapid COVID tests that have never been examined, thoroughly, for cross-reactivity with the vaccine.

And this is an entirely separate issue from the huge number of deaths and severe injuries directly caused by the vaccine.

Except…it isn’t a separate issue, because, if very large numbers of vaccinated people are then testing positive for COVID, and the positive tests are occurring because of cross-reactivity, this is contributing to the lunatic medical assertion that people must take TOXIC boosters, to ward off the possibility of “catching COVID” after just one or two vaccine injections.

Bottom line: It’s inexcusable and criminal for a public health agency to approve a test that hasn’t been vetted for cross reactivity with a vaccine, when the vaccine has been taken by millions of people.

I’ll give you one educated speculation about cross reactivity. The COVID test is looking for a piece of RNA ASSUMED to be part of “the virus.” The vaccine contains some part of that RNA-piece. Therefore, when the test is run—depending on the sensitivity of the test—many previously vaccinated people are going to be “positive” for “the virus.”

It’s all fun and games—if you consider destruction of lives fun and games.

People who have taken the vaccine, and then are told to get tested, could say, “I want you to guarantee that the test has been thoroughly vetted for cross reactivity with the vaccine. Prove it.”

I’m not saying this argument would fly, legally speaking, because appearing in courts before judges is a roll of the dice; but the employer who ordered the test might back off.

This, however, is definitely NOT a recommendation that anyone should take the vaccine in the first place.


power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Source: https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2022/01/11/vaccinated-people-who-then-test-positive-for-covid-the-wave-is-building/

One thought on “Vaccinated people who then test positive for COVID; the wave is building

  1. https://stateofthenation.co/?p=103783

    Over 1000 Scientific Research Papers Prove Covid Vaccines Were Deliberately Lab-engineered as Bioweapons
    Posted on January 13, 2022 by State of the Nation
    COVID-19 Vaccines: Scientific Proof of Lethality
    Post published: 5 January 2022 at https://www.saveusnow.org.uk/covid-vaccine-scientific-proof-lethal

    SUN
    saveusnow.org.uk

    Over One Thousand Scientific Studies Prove That the COVID-19 Vaccines Are Dangerous, and All Those Pushing This Agenda Are Committing the Indictable Crime of Gross Misconduct in Public Office

    Just over 12 months from deployment of the COVID 19 emergency use experimental vaccines, scientific studies in the thousands, and reports of criminal complaints of assault and murder from the illegal, unlawful use of biochemical poisons made to police forces around the country, verify an assault on an unsuspecting UK population. Irrefutable science shows that the COVID 19 vaccine is not safe and not effective in limiting transmission or infection from the SARS-CoV-2, coronavirus pathogens.

    The “safe and effective” false propaganda, put out by public officials who now are continuing to push this vaccine, is a clear breach of duty. A public office holder is subject to, and aware of, a duty to prevent death or serious injury that arises only by virtue of the functions of the public office.

    Many have breached that duty and, in doing so, are recklessly causing a risk of death or serious injury, by carrying on regardless of the now-confirmed dangers associated with COVID 19 injections. Some of these risks are blood clotting, myocarditis, pericarditis, thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, anaphylaxis, Bell’s palsy, Guillain-Barre, cancer including deaths, etc.

    All of these are confirmed in the following science-and-government-gathered data from the UK Health and Security agency on COVID 19 regarding vaccine damage.

    The term “vaccine” was changed recently to incorporate this illegal, unlawful medical experiment to facilitate usage of mRNA technology that is demonstrably not a vaccine, and which contains biologically toxic nano-metamaterials associated with 5G urban data gathering capability.

    Metal nanoparticulates are known in science to be genotoxic—a poison that can also cause sterilization. The dangers posed to the victims in the near term from this medical battery are now known. However, the long term lethality of this weapon is not as yet realized due to the debilitating effects it has on the immune system, causing Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome(AIDS).

    We can now confirm the 2017 depopulation defence-intelligence documents, showing the planned murder of over 55 million across the United Kingdom by 2025 using this biochemical weapon.

    The Medicines and Healthcare (products) Regulatory Agency (MHRA) had prior warning of the expected large numbers of adverse reactions before the deployment—confirming the premeditated nature of the crime and public conduct offences then and now.Continued on link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.