colinnew
If one were to step back for a moment and honestly look at this current monkeypox craze, one would see that the story that is being sold doesn’t quite add up. As there is a plethora of conflicting and contradictory evidence being presented about this “viral” outbreak in such a quick and shortened timeframe, it can get pretty confusing and frustrating trying to make any sense out of the propaganda being thrown about by the media like empty banana peels just waiting to be slipped on by the unsuspecting passerby. Thus, it seems like the perfect time to examine the claims to see what we can uncover.
Rapid Spread in Non-Endemic Areas?
If we were to follow the germ theory narrative, infectious diseases don’t just crop up over various parts of the world all at the same time. The outbreak would occur gradually, usually in one country considered the “hotspot” and then spread slowly to the surrounding areas. This transfer of infection would occur person-to-person after someone had become infected where the disease was endemic, i.e. where it is regularly found amongst the people.
However, the monkeypox outbreak is somehow bucking this trend. According to the WHO:
“Reported cases thus far have no established travel links to an endemic area. Based on currently available information, cases have mainly but not exclusively been identified amongst men who have sex with men (MSM) seeking care in primary care and sexual health clinics.”
“The identification of confirmed and suspected cases of monkeypox with no direct travel links to an endemic area represents a highly unusual event. Surveillance to date in non-endemic areas has been limited, but is now expanding. WHO expects that more cases in non-endemic areas will be reported.”
We can see that this outbreak is unusual in that it is rapidly occurring among people (mostly gay men) in non-endemic countries who have no history of travel to the areas where monkeypox is said to occur. That statement right there should sound the alarm and raise the red flags for everyone. Monkeypox is supposed to be a “virus” that is not highly contagious and one that is difficult to transmit. According to a recent article in the Boston Globe:
Monkeypox is not highly contagious, scientists say. So why is it suddenly in nine countries?
Are the cases related?
“Some appear to be, but scientists have so far been unable to establish common links across so many countries and are still trying to understand how these cases may or may not be related. “The geographic dispersion of this is quite rare,” Bausch said.
Another puzzling aspect of this outbreak is how fast the cases and symptoms have been popping up, leading some to wonder if this is a new strain of monkeypox with a shorter incubation period.
“Either something is fundamentally different here, or there are more to these cases than we understand,” said Dr. Meghan May, professor of infectious disease at the University of New England College of Medicine in Maine.
Is monkeypox a sexually transmitted disease?
“The virus has not typically been known to spread through sexual contact. But many of the confirmed and suspected cases across several of the countries are among men aged 20 to 55 who report having sex with other men. And many of the reports have come from health facilities that provide care for patients with sexually transmitted diseases.”
The media wants us to believe that we have unrelated monkeypox cases occurring in non-endemic countries breaking out almost exclusively amongst gay men who were being seen for STD’s and are being diagnosed with a “virus” that is not highly contagious which is not known to spread through sexual activity. That is quite the giant pill of BS to swallow. It is especially difficult to swallow when viewing how suspected and confirmed monkeypox cases are defined. Again, according to the WHO:
Suspected case:
“A person of any age presenting in a monkeypox non-endemic country[2] with an unexplained acute rash
AND
One or more of the following signs or symptoms, since 15 March 2022:
- Headache
- Acute onset of fever (>38.5°C)
- Lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes)
- Myalgia (muscle and body aches)
- Back pain
- Asthenia (profound weakness)
AND
for which the following common causes of acute rash do not explain the clinical picture: varicella zoster, herpes zoster, measles, Zika, dengue, chikungunya, herpes simplex, bacterial skin infections, disseminated gonococcus infection, primary or secondary syphilis, chancroid, lymphogranuloma venereum, granuloma inguinale, molluscum contagiosum, allergic reaction (e.g., to plants); and any other locally relevant common causes of papular or vesicular rash.
N.B. It is not necessary to obtain negative laboratory results for listed common causes of rash illness in order to classify a case as suspected.“
Confirmed case:
“A case meeting the definition of either a suspected or probable case and is laboratory confirmed for monkeypox virus by detection of unique sequences of viral DNA either by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and/or sequencing.”
“Endemic monkeypox disease is normally geographically limited to West and Central Africa. The identification of confirmed and suspected cases of monkeypox without any travel history to an endemic area in multiple countries is atypical, hence, there is an urgent need to raise awareness about monkeypox and undertake comprehensive case finding and isolation (provided with supportive care), contact tracing and supportive care to limit further onward transmission.”
As can be seen, all that is needed to become a suspected case of monkeypox is having an acute rash in a non-endemic country along with symptoms typically associated with monkeypox. However, this obviously creates a bit of a problem as the same symptoms seen in monkeypox are common in many diseases. It is also claimed that the monkeypox cases are atypical, which means that the symptoms are irregular and/or unusual:
“With the exception of cases sporadically reported in travellers from endemic countries, cases in non- endemic areas that are not linked to travel from endemic countries are not typical. At the present time (as of May 2022) there is no clear link between the cases reported and travel from endemic countries and no link with infected animals.”
The symptoms could be relatively mild (such as one pox on the genital area), lack regular symptoms altogether (no fever, no rash), or they can mimic or present as any of the other various skin eruptive diseases (as is occuring right now as the symptoms are being confused with STD’s). The WHO readily admits that monkeypox lesions can not be easily distinguished from among the various other diseases that cause skin eruptions:
“Due to the range of conditions that cause skin rashes and because clinical presentation may more often be atypical in this outbreak, it can be challenging to differentiate monkeypox solely based on the clinical presentation, particularly for cases with an atypical presentation. It is therefore important to consider other potential causes of discrete skin lesions or a disseminated rash; Examples of other aetiologies for similar-appearing skin lesions at the different stages of development include herpes simplex virus, varicella zoster virus, molluscum contagiosum virus, enterovirus, measles, scabies, Treponema pallidum (syphilis), bacterial skin infections, medication allergies, parapoxviruses (causing orf and related conditions) and chancroid (2).”
Oddly, while they essentially claim that these other causes need to be ruled out, it is not required to do so by way of laboratory testing. Thus, it is up to the interpretation of the attending physician to distinguish between these diseases based on appearance alone, something the WHO admitted is challenging to differentiate especially given the atypical nature of the “outbreak.” Regardless, once a case is suspected, all that is needed in order to jump from a suspected to a confirmed case is a positive PCR test. For obvious reasons, this creates its own set of problems.
Laboratory Confirmation?
First of all, it is stated that the material from the skin lesion is the fluid used to “confirm” a diagnosis. They do, however, allow for the testing of other bodily fluids not from the lesions such as oropharyngeal swabs and urine yet the WHO admits that there is limited data on the accuracy in regards to the testing of these fluids. The WHO leaves it up to the clinical presentation and the location of the lesion in order to determine whether or not the fluids with unknown accuracy should be used for confirmatory testing:
“On 23 May 2022 the WHO issued interim guidance for laboratory testing for the monkeypox virus. Laboratory confirmation of monkeypox relies principally on nucleic acid amplification tests, such as PCR, performed on material from the skin lesion. Testing of other body fluids and tissues, including oropharyngeal swabs, urine, semen, rectal and/or genital swabs, may be indicated based on the clinical presentation and location of the lesions. However, data on the accuracy of testing on these samples is still limited.”
Beyond the issue of using fluids which have unknown accuracy to confirm a case, according to the CDC, there are no commercial assays that can specifically detect the monkeypox “virus:”
“It is recommended that testing for monkeypox be performed in facilities that have recently vaccinated personnel, the necessary equipment, engineering controls, personal protective equipment, and appropriate diagnostic assays available. Diagnostic testing for Orthopoxviruses (which includes monkeypox virus) is available at LRN laboratories located throughout the United States and abroad. There is no commercial assay to detect monkeypox virus.”
This means that labs across the country looking for monkeypox cases are using tests that look for any “orthopoxvirus,” which is a group comprised of 12 species including smallpox, cowpox, horsepox, camelpox, raccoonpox, skunkpox, monkeypox, and vaccina. Any positive test is assumed to be monkeypox if it occurs in a country where the “virus” is not endemic. As noted before, the cases reported are in non-endemic countries that have no links to endemic areas.
Oddly enough, this lack of specificity, while not an issue for confirming a case by way of PCR, apparently is a problem for antigen and antibody testing. According to the WHO, antigen and antibody tests are useless as they are also not specific for monkeypox:
“Detection of viral DNA by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is the preferred laboratory test for monkeypox. The best diagnostic specimens are directly from the rash – skin, fluid or crusts, or biopsy where feasible. Antigen and antibody detection methods may not be useful as they do not distinguish between orthopoxviruses.”
As there are no commercial assays nor antigen/antibody tests specific for monkeypox, after the PCR test comes back positive for all “orthopoxviruses,” the sample is then sent to the very “capable” and “trustworthy” CDC for confirmatory testing as per the smallpox protocols:
“The testing protocols for monkeypox stem from the country’s smallpox preparedness planning. When someone seeks care for a suspicious rash, facilities in what’s called the Laboratory Response Network — a collection of state, local, veterinary, and military labs tapped to test for biological or chemical threats — perform the initial test to see if the cause is an orthopox virus. Samples are also sent to CDC to confirm which type. The system for poxviruses was designed specifically so the CDC would handle any cases of smallpox, McQuiston said. (Smallpox, which once was often lethal, is the only human disease that’s been eradicated, but a small number of labs have stores of the virus that causes it for research purposes.)”
“In this circumstance, an orthopox diagnosis at the LRN is monkeypox until proven otherwise,” said John Brooks, a CDC medical epidemiologist.”
While trusting the CDC, the very organization that needs disease outbreaks in order to stay funded and relevant, to accurately and honestly test to confirm anything should be alarming, there is an even more prominent problem with this scenario. As per the CDC smallpox protocols, PCR can not be used for confirmation of any “virus” when the disease prevalence is low:
“For patients with a high risk of having smallpox, the state health department will contact CDC to conduct laboratory testing to confirm or rule out smallpox. In the absence of known smallpox disease, the predictive value of a positive smallpox test diagnosis is low, so only cases that meet the clinical definition of the disease should be tested.”
This same issue regarding disease prevalence affecting the accuracy of PCR test results was pointed out by the WHO back in January 2021 regarding “SARS-COV-2:”
“WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). 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 prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.”
Disease prevalence is the measure of how common a disease is in an at-risk population at a specific time point or period. The CDC measures disease prevalence in this way:
As monkeypox symptoms naturally mimic and overlap with other diseases causing skin eruptions and the current cases are said to be atypical thus making it even more difficult to differentiate based on symptoms, there is no way to determine a case as monkeypox based on clinical diagnosis alone. This is why it is stated that laboratory testing by PCR is needed for confirmation. However, as the disease prevalence is low in a non-endemic country (granted, as only a few thousand cases occur every year in Africa, it can be argued that prevalence is low in endemic areas as well), the predictive accuracy of PCR is considered low as it generates mostly false-positives. This creates a bit of a conundrum which I wrote about previously. If PCR is needed to figure out how many cases of a disease is present in order to determine prevalence, yet prevalence is needed to be known in order to know whether any PCR result is accurate in order to determine the cases, how can either measure, which depends upon the other to be correct, be accurate?
In Summary:
- Reported monkeypox cases thus far have no established travel links to an endemic area
- Cases have mainly but not exclusively been identified amongst men who have sex with men (MSM) seeking care in primary care and sexual health clinics (i.e. suspicion of an STD)
- The identification of confirmed and suspected cases of monkeypox with no direct travel links to an endemic area represents a highly unusual event
- WHO expects that more cases in non-endemic areas will be reported
- Scientists have so far been unable to establish common links across so many countries
- “The geographic dispersion of this is quite rare,” Bausch said
- Another puzzling aspect of this outbreak is how fast the cases and symptoms have been popping up
- “Either something is fundamentally different here, or there are more to these cases than we understand,” said Dr. Meghan May
- Even though the majority of the cases are among gay men being treated for STD’s, the “virus” has not typically been known to spread through sexual contact
- According the to WHO, in order to be a suspected case of monkeypox, a person of any age must present in a monkeypox non-endemic country with an unexplained acute rash with any of the following symptoms:
- Headache
- Acute onset of fever (>38.5°C)
- Lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes)
- Myalgia (muscle and body aches)
- Back pain
- Asthenia (profound weakness)
- The following common causes of acute rash must not explain the clinical picture:
- Varicella zoster (Chickenpox)
- Herpes zoster (Shingles)
- Measles
- Zika
- Dengue
- Chikungunya
- Herpes simplex
- Bacterial skin infections
- Disseminated gonococcus infection
- Primary or secondary syphilis
- Chancroid
- Lymphogranuloma venereum
- Inguinal granuloma
- Molluscum contagiosum
- Allergic reaction (e.g., to plants)
- Any other locally relevant common causes of papular or vesicular rash
- They also state that it is not necessary to obtain negative laboratory results for listed common causes of rash illness in order to classify a case as suspected
- In other words, while one must rule out these common skin eruptions that are regularly confused with monkeypox, one does not need to rule them out by laboratory testing
- In order to be a “confirmed” case, all that is needed is either a suspected or probable case and is laboratory confirmed for monkeypox “virus” by detection of unique sequences of “viral” DNA either by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and/or sequencing
- In other words, one only needs to be suspected of having monkeypox in a non-endemic country and does not need other similar diseases to be ruled out by laboratory testing while only needing a positive PCR test for monkeypox to become confirmed
- The WHO admits that identification of confirmed and suspected cases of monkeypox without any travel history to an endemic area in multiple countries is atypical
- The WHO also states that due to the range of conditions that cause skin rashes and because clinical presentation may more often be atypical in this outbreak, it can be challenging to differentiate monkeypox solely based on the clinical presentation, particularly for cases with an atypical presentation
- Laboratory confirmation of monkeypox relies principally on nucleic acid amplification tests, such as PCR, performed on material from the skin lesion
- Testing of other body fluids and tissues, including oropharyngeal swabs, urine, semen, rectal and/or genital swabs, may be indicated based on the clinical presentation and location of the lesions yet data on the accuracy of testing on these samples is still limited
- Diagnostic testing for “orthopoxviruses” (which includes monkeypox “virus”) is available at LRN laboratories as there is no commercial assay to detect monkeypox “virus” (i.e. the PCR results are not specific for monkeypox)
- Antigen and antibody detection methods may not be useful as they do not distinguish between “orthopoxviruses”
- The Laboratory Response Network — a collection of state, local, veterinary, and military labs tapped to test for biological or chemical threats — perform the initial test to see if the cause is an orthopox “virus”
- Samples are then sent to CDC to confirm which type
- The system for “poxviruses” was designed specifically so the CDC would handle any cases of smallpox
- “In this circumstance, an orthopox diagnosis at the LRN is monkeypox until proven otherwise,” said John Brooks, a CDC medical epidemiologist
- According to the CDC’s smallpox protocols currently in use for monkeypox, in the absence of known disease (as in a non-endemic country), the predictive value of a positive test diagnosis is low
- In January 2021, the WHO reminded IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases
- This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result is truly infected with the “virus” decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity
If we are to believe the official monkeypox narrative, we are currently witnessing the rapid global expansion of a monkeypox “virus” that is said not to be highly contagious and relatively difficult to transmit. We are seeing this “virus” pop up in non-endemic countries that do not regularly see cases of monkeypox and in people with no travel history to endemic areas. We are seeing the symptoms presenting themselves in atypical and irregular ways mimicking many other diseases including STD’s. We are seeing the “virus” almost exclusively attack gay men through a sexual transmission route for which it is not known to spread. The PCR tests for the “virus” are not specific to the monkeypox and are inaccurate when disease prevalence is low, as is currently the case. If one were to look at this monkeypox craze both critically and logically, they would realize that this fear-campaign has the makings of yet another Testing Pandemic. They may have fooled you once before. Now there is no reason for them to be able to do so again.
