Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Was in US Earlier Than Previously Thought

I. National Institutes of Health (NIH) research1 published June 15, 2021, finds antibody evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the U.S. earlier than previously thought.

1. Why did it take NIH so long to do this experiment, or perhaps to tell us? These antibody tests take only a few minutes to perform. The blood was drawn more than 15 months ago.
2. Why is NIH relying on these two antibodies in nine individuals as evidence of COVID infection, but will not let a single U.S. person use them as evidence of prior infection and immunity?

“A participant was considered seropositive if they tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies on the Abbott Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG ELISA and the EUROIMMUN SARS-CoV-2 ELISA in a sequential testing algorithm.
Sensitivity and specificity of the Abbott and EUROIMMUNE ELISAs and the net sensitivity and specificity of the sequential testing algorithm were estimated with 95% confidence intervals.”2

3. The old excuse that we don’t know how long immunity lasts has been crushed by the data from several studies. Perhaps unsurprisingly, one of avuncular Tony Fauci’s early emails said he expected immunity to be long-lasting. But Americans were told lies to push the vaccine program and keep people frightened of COVID even after they had recovered and were immune.

II. “The NIH report states that the CDC testing guidelines early in the pandemic had a narrow focus: Only people who had been in contact with a person confirmed to have an infection, or who had traveled to an area known to have coronavirus transmission, were advised to be tested.”3

1. What The Washington Post fails to make clear is that the test for COVID — the only test permitted to be used by federal agencies — from January 1, 2020, until early March 2020, was grossly inaccurate. CDC knew this. To cover it up, they allowed only a tiny number of people to get tested during this period, virtually restricting testing to those who already had a confirmatory clinical picture.

2. This CDC coverup had terrible consequences, possibly intended. It gave the infection two months to spread through the U.S. and become established via community transmission.

3. By this time, the tracing of contacts to control the epidemic had already been made obsolete. There was way too much unidentified spread happening. Track and trace does not work when most infections are asymptomatic.

4. It is conceivable that CDC keeps claiming that the vast majority of infections have symptoms in order to justify the many billions of dollars travelling through CDC’s hands for the track and trace program,4 which is still active.

5. The program cannot possibly work to control the pandemic at this late stage. The only purpose to use track and trace now is to obtain data on citizens’ social networks.

III. Seven of nine persons whose blood tested positive for antibodies were black or Hispanic. Therefore, the authors are concerned about possibly increased susceptibility in minority populations. Aha! Now we know why this story was dribbled out now. To scare black and Hispanic Americans into vaccination.

*This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health, Office of the Director and the National Cancer Institute.