Testing sites overrun with hypochondriacs being tested unnecessarily for COVID19

Testing sites all across EZFKA are currently being inundated with hypochondriacs being tested for COVID19, even if they have no symptoms.

Some sites are reporting wait times up to 5 or 6 hours, with others turning people away.

NSW resident John, on holiday in Queensland, described the scene.

“What could be more scientific than standing in line for 5 hours with thousands of other people to get tested for something that could possibly be spread in that line?” John said.

‘I’m so glad I complied with everything the last two years. Now I have to wait in line for hours in the searing Cairns heat and humidity just so I can move within my own country.”

Pfizer has announced they are currently in talks with Prime Minister Scott Morrison for supplying more Raid Antigen Tests.

2.5 2 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

people like to make the excuse all these people are just getting tested bc they want to travel interstate, sure some of them might be but thats mostly bullshit imo

Agent 47

Yep. A lot of people don’t want to admit they’ve been scammed. Netherlands admitting 6 doses, Israel onto their 4th. WA mandating their third, etc

I don’t care about those people anymore, it’s a humility and personality type issue rather than an IQ one IMO, given the amount of intelligent people that are still lining up.


How does this imply they’ve been scammed ?

the vaccines do reduce severity of symptoms, it’s just that the effect isn’t durable so you need more

the only scam is that they claimed the vaccines would reduce transmission , and used that to justify vaccine mandates and passports

of course it was never the case which I could see from the beginning

so now they have quietly moved the goalposts back to needing the vaccine to reduce “stress on the health system”

which is possibly fair enough, but nobody seems to give a shit about obesity, alcohol, smoking, risk taking behaviours, Dan holding up an icu bed after he was PFO etc etc

Agent 47

I’m happy to be wrong but it’s a scam from the time videos of people Falling over in the street in China with no context started surfacing and have largely been forgotten about.

Now we have athletes collapsing with heart issues on an unprecedented scale and no one seems to give a shit.


I agree the overall Covid scam has been heavily manipulated with a bizarrely excessive response

it’s been overblown since day one, lockdowns were never justified, and it’s been largely a media hysteria

I was saying that from March 2020 on MB before I got banned (“psycho”) and I was completely correct

but when you make ridiculous statements from “our side” you diminish the credibility of all “our” points

so just clarify that the vaccine wasn’t a scam
it was In fact a pretty remarkable achievement of modern science and medicine

just that the lockdowns, mandates, passport and general hysteria were never justified

Agent 47

Was never claiming our side, just my opinion.

The vaccines have turned out to be trash and now just a cash cow for the pharma lobby for a mild cold.

People want to take it they can go ahead, forcing those who refuse into starvation is retarded.


They aren’t trash

that’s a ridiculous thing to say

equally as ridiculous as making them mandatory


They aren’t trash

These are trash because they seem to be nothing more than an injectable bandaid and/or a tourniquet – something to get you going and/or until you get the proper medical attendance.
If we see Fizzler and Astra Zenga as a symptom treatment (aka Aspirin, Paracetamol etc) then there is value in them.

Reus's Large MEMBER

Just that taking a normal dose of pains meds does not give you heart disease or ADE


They aren’t trash

I’d say they are. The side effect rate is so high that pre covid they would have failed the approval process. In fact I bet they did for other diseases.
That is why pfizer was obsessed with getting all legal liabilities paid for by the goverments to the point of demanding collateral to secure it.

Let that sink in, pre covid they would have failed the approval process

Reus's Large MEMBER

Well they did fail the approval process for 20 years because the test subjects kept dying in the long term trials, that is the mRNA technology


they were scammed but, this was meant to be a two shot deal. “fully vaccinated” is a term that has pretty strong connotations towards suggesting that. i heard from heaps of people that two shots would bthe end.

i agree they reduce the severity of symptoms, but im not sure if its something i’d want to keep taking over and over. if i was obese or some unhealthy loser or old i would probably go with the vaxxes, but why kids and healthy young ppl like me need them is beyond fucking me.

Agent 47

Is the flu vaccine “fully vaccinated” ?

no you need a new one every fucking year

it’s just the way things are for URTIs

im glad we have flu vaccines for those that want them (though the jury is still out on whether they are actually beneficial )

but its equally ridiculous to think of having flu vaccine mandates or flu vaccine passports

Aussie Soy Boy

In the beginning they said you’d have two injections and then have immunity levels similar to the measles vaccine.

They couldn’t have been more wrong.


i dont remember anybody saying that

Even after the initial trials, they reported the vaccine would reduce the incidence of SEVERE disease by 90%
They didn’t even bother to test for asymptomatic disease

Which is why it was clear that the vaccines would never result in herd immunity, and there was never evidence that they would reduce transmission

provide a link if you think anyone official claimed differently

Aussie Soy Boy

Fauci said there would be herd immunity by second half of 2021? The expert was wrong I guess.

This is what the experts were saying November last year.

Still, the efficacy figures reported, particularly by Pfizer and Moderna, are up there with some of the best vaccines we have, and far exceed the US Food and Drug Administration’s requirement that coronavirus vaccines be at least 50 per cent effective to be approved.

“If you’re a vaccine researcher, getting a vaccine over 90 per cent is a gold star — that’s your dream,” Dr Quinn said.

We’re living the dream aren’t we!

Pfizer said its two-dose vaccine, BNT162b2, was well-tolerated and that side effects were mostly mild to moderate, and cleared up quickly.

It said the only severe adverse events experienced by volunteers were fatigue and headaches.

Out of 8,000 participants, 2 per cent had headaches after the second dose while 3.8 per cent experienced fatigue.

Obviously the trial was inadequate. Not one incidence of clotting or heart inflammation.


the trial absolutely was inadequate

They even cancelled the control arm ffs

This WOULD have been an appropriate course of action for a very deadly virus of course

However it wasn’t an appropriate course of action for covid-19

as far as effectiveness goes, it depends what your endpoint is
The endpoint they chose was severe disease
Yes it was effective (for a short time)

Show me a link of fauci declaring that the vaccine would give us herd immunity
Of course he is a clown, and has been wrong about many things, so he could have said it but I don’t recall him actually saying it

Last edited 2 years ago by Coming
James Linden

Show me a link of fauci declaring that the vaccine would give us herd immunity

Fauci: Herd Immunity Unreachable Unless Vaccine Hesitant Get The Jab Or Get Infected
Fauci told MSNBC’s “The Mehdi Hassan Show” that herd immunity—the concept that a community can be protected against a virus when there is a high enough level of overall immunity—could be achieved “really easily if we get everyone vaccinated.” 


Reus's Large MEMBER

AH actually lord Fuckwit (Fauci) and the leader of the corrupt disease corporation (CDC) did actually say that the vaccines would be 100% effective against getting and transmitting the virus.

There is a montage of videos going around where they say 100% then 90% then 80% and so on all the way to 40% effective and at the same time saying how it would prevent catching and transmitting and then yes you could catch it and then yes you will catch it and transmit it and then to yes you will get the whuflu, transmit the whuflu but you just won’t be as sick as the pure bloods, I am sure that the last point will be moot in the near future too as the long term side effects start to take their toll

Remember that the mRNA vaccines have been around for 20 years the reason that they have not been used is that all the test subjects died within 5 years from a minor illness that should not have killed them.

Aussie Soy Boy

Do we just take their word that the vaccines are reducing symptoms? I’m sure there is some effect but do we take their word after the stage 3 trials that showed immunity in 90% of people actually showed no such thing in the real world. In fact it’s showing the opposite with Omicron the vaccinated seem more susceptible and infectious. The experts and science couldn’t have been more wrong.

COVID deaths in the UK were always going to stabilise after the first waves as the weakest and most susceptible to the novel virus were cleaned out.

It’s not a zombie virus that kills all or kills randomly. It kills the old, sick and unhealthy, people who survive develop resistance. Less people will then die in the next wave and so on unless the virus becomes more deadly.


Your last few paragraphs are correct and exactly what I was saying on MB in March 2020 before I got banned

but again, your first statement is just not defensible and diminishes our shared credibility

yes the vaccine reduces severity of symptoms (for a time)

any apparent increase in vulnerability of the vaccinated is almost certainly due to selection bias (healthy people are less likely to be vaccinated)

there’s nothing to support VAIDS or ADE theories at this stage, but of course I will keep an open mind and time will tell


any apparent increase in vulnerability of the vaccinated is almost certainly due to selection bias (healthy people are less likely to be vaccinated)

that might fly at 50% population vaccination rates.

at 80%+ or 90%+ – no fucking way! It would have to be one of the biggest accidental coincidences on earth that in every country, those 6%-12% remaining unvaccinated have somehow (self-selected!!!!) ended up being the ones particularly un-susceptible to the virus.

the reality is that the remaining unjabbed are:

  • real antivaxers (using the old definition)
  • Naive or dumb people who have bought into a particular brand of hype preached by some anti-jab prophet
  • Smart people who have made what they think is a rational decision after attempting to make an inquiry
  • elites who don’t need to work
  • kids

but again, your first statement is just not defensible and diminishes our shared credibility 

my view is the same as yours – that the jabs do seem effective at reducing severity of illness, at least for a while.

…on this topic, I do find the allegation that the jabs actually make people MORE susceptible to infection (and/or symptomatic illness) for the first 10-14 days after administration quite interesting. If this is true, then, combined with the fact that people who test positive <2 weeks after second dose are counted as unvaccinated this does have the potential to underly a massive statistical fraud. But I don’t think that there is a way of knowing if the allegation is true, in the short term.

Last edited 2 years ago by Peachy

no offence but you are wrong

It’s more like 70% vaccinated in the UK (we found out recently they were counting recovered cases as vaccinated)

But even at 90%, it is very unlikely that many of the 10% unvaccinated are obese, elderly, chronic medical illness
Maybe 10% of those (1%) will be just obstinate and stupid enough to refuse the vaccine

Let’s assume that 50% of the population is in the vulnerable/obese/elderly group overall (vaccinated and unvaccinated)

We would see that only 10% of the unvaccinated group would be vulnerable (90% relatively invulnerable)
Whereas effectively 50% of the vaccinated group would be vulnerable (50% invulnerable)
But the vulnerable population overall would be 99% vaccinated (1% unvax)
The invulnerable population would be 89% vaccinated (11% unvax)

Now let’s assume that being in the vulnerable group 10x the risk, regardless of vaccine status

Its quite easy to see that the vaccinated group will represent over 50% of the severe cases

I know very few elderly people who have refused the vaccine
Even the idiot obese like W@F seem to know what’s good for them
The main vaccine refusers are angry incels/conspiracy theorists and hippies/health freaks
All of whom are generally fairly lean and clean living


You do realise when you assume, it makes an ass of you and me.

Reus's Large MEMBER

Yeah nah bro, all the pure bloods that I know are smart people and have not had the vaccines due to not trusting the mRNA vaccines based on looking at the facts around them. Let’s break it down for you

  1. No long term trial data
  2. Dodgy trial data
  3. Suppression of alternative treatments
  4. Mandates
  5. Media / government obfuscation of data / facts
  6. Suppression of side effects
  7. Vaccines for kids when they have pretty much 100% chance of survival from getting the virus
  8. All the side effects of the vaccine, my daughter has pericarditis from the vaccine, her friend has blood clots, her friends mom has myocarditis, we have 10 people at my work out of 185 that have pericarditis
  9. Stillbirth data being suppressed, Gosford hospital normally has 1-2 still births a year and is now averaging 17 per week.
  10. Athletes dropping dead, soccer players in Europe are now at 4 per week dying of heart attacks

All these things led to loss of trust in the vaccines and authority and it’s safety. All for a virus that my age group ,40-49 has a 99.997% survival rate from getting.


From memory ‘coming’ is the chap that is ultra wealthy, in a high paying job, but got the Jab to keep his job?
Reality is > not enough ‘fuck you’ money, and has to cope post on the internet.


Chap hey? I only know one other poster that uses that word. It would be ironic if the poster who has repeatedly lectured people about showing him respect, set up a troll account to serially disrespect others.




You don’t deserve this, but enjoy anyway.


yes the vaccine reduces severity of symptoms (for a time)

But what does having experimental gene altering injections 4 times a year every year do? And anything less than that you may as well not have anything. Covid is not going away.

Shae The Burmese

Yes, you’ve highlighted perfectly the idiocy of this thing – vaccines reduce severity (lets assume that’s the case), but so does being healthy and fit in the first place, ie. the lifestyle factors mentioned in your last sentence.


Waffling gave you a 1. So I gave you a 5.

I guess he isn’t going to loose weight this year.


I reckon Winning@Failing could lose weight & he could blog about it on ezfka.Com with regular fortnightly features detailing his progress!


Look at this lazy bitch still trying to get me to write articles to cover the fact she ain’t got shit and her regualr contributors are delusional retards lol


Fuck, saw right through that ruse.


Reus's Large MEMBER

Did you want some pepper and tweezers ……

Aussie Soy Boy

Was Weak@sFuck one of the fatties getting upset with me the other day?


The only way we’ll ever know if I’m salty at you is if you post in the official ezfka eoy thread that stags posted and let me have a stab at ya. Otherwise all we know is that you’re another retard that follows the click bait drip feed.


Nah bitch, someone else must’ve one starred lol, I’ve only just read and one starred myself 4 hours after you jumped at shadows and blamed me. Lol look at you tards, anyone disagrees, must be w@f, no way could anyone else disagree, newsflash – this community is as divided as any other despite the fact most of you are too piss weak to openly disagree with each other. Suck a fat bag of dicks

Agent 47

6 LOL.

The EU digital certificate has 8 spaces IIRC. I dont think were going to get that far with a million other things in the horizon.


I’ve got shares in a pathology company, so I’m all for the needless testing.


What’s the breakdown between the Don and Brandon?



Not sure who posted it here awhile ago….but once again this site is in front of the game.



When it gets our Kangaroo’s it will be time to run to the hills.

Agent 47



We’ve officially hit peak sheeple. Woman self-isolates in airplane toilet for five hours:


Happy new year!



Holy shit did Aboriginal people set fire to old parliament house? This video is mental can anyone verify?


So not just did this happen, but the media said ‘protestors accidentally set the door on fire’

This is f’ed.

Agent 47

Yes they did and they blamed it on pepper spray. Lol.


No chance the ABC will see racism here is there?

Not just are they profiling by race, but they’re also sending out armed escorts to inject those specific, singled out by race, people with an experimental gene therapy.

Nah. Nothing racist about that, clearly.

Last edited 2 years ago by T

Comment I saw somewhere…

It’s a long and complex story.

But today, the government are treating Aboriginal people in the NT like cattle.

Any Aboriginal person in the NT that is a close contact must go to the government quarantine facility against their will. The authorities don’t think they’ll stay at home so they don’t have the same rights to isolate at home as non-Aboriginal people do.

Any positive COVID test lands Aboriginal people into a forced hospital stay. Again, because they “can’t be trusted” like the rest of us in the NT, Australia.

Authorities are force vaccinating longrassers (Mostly Aboriginal people sleeping rough in Darwin and Alice Springs. They aren’t homeless, they’ve come in from their homes in remote communities and they’d prefer to sleep under a tree than pay for accommodation.)

They say it’s voluntary, but the health authorities injecting them have an armed police escort. For people who are already wary of police, what option do they have? Besides, they are literally offered cash to get the injection. So much for informed consent.

I said elsewhere, I don’t agree with everything these people are arguing, but they don’t completely agree with me either so who am I to judge. They’ve helped me, a white man, in the past and I will do anything for David Cole and his mob.

They are good people.

And much respect to Uncle Jimmy, one of the oldest Aboriginal law men in the NT and Australia. He’s one of the quietest and most softly spoken men you’ll ever meet, but the words that he says can cut right through to your spirit! Not kidding!


So true.


And this week, a new article in JAMA Internal Medicine shows data that, frankly, calls into question the very existence of long COVID.
I’ll show my cards now: I think this study is fairly problematic, and I’ll walk you through the problems in a minute. But first, a reminder that no one is saying that symptoms do not occur after COVID. The biological question of interest is twofold. Does COVID cause these symptoms, and, if so, does COVID uniquely cause these symptoms?
In other words, does long COVID occur because people survived a really bad illness? After all, prepandemic studies show that two thirds of people who survive an intensive care unit (ICU) stay have persistent symptoms. But is COVID uniquely bad — uniquely harmful to a variety of organ systems, out of proportion to severity of illness?
The unique finding in the JAMA Internal Medicinestudy? The presence of long COVID symptoms was more strongly associated with the belief you had COVID than whether you actually had COVID. The implication, left unsaid, is: It’s all in your head. Here’s how it worked.


Researchers in France leveraged an existing population-based cohort study that had been running since around 2012. From May to December 2020 — right during the peak of the first wave in France — they asked around 36,000 participants to volunteer to send in a blood sample to detect anti–SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. These seroprevalence data tell us whether those individuals had prior infection.
From December 2020 to January 2021, they asked those same people to tell them about their persistent symptoms and, critically, whether they thought that they had contracted COVID.
What this created was four groups of people:

  1. The negatives (those without serologic evidence of infection who didn’t think they had been infected) — these were the overwhelming majority.
  2. The positives — people who thought they had been infected and, indeed, had serologic evidence to that effect.
  3. The asymptomatics — people with serologic evidence of infection who never knew they were infected.
  4. The people who thought they had been infected but had no serologic evidence to that effect.

Now, if long-COVID is caused by and is unique toCOVID, you would expect that the prevalence of long-COVID symptoms would be higher in people with serologic evidence of COVID infection than those who merely thought they had COVID infection. But that’s not what was seen here.
A couple of symptoms illustrate the difference.

In each case, you were more likely to report the symptom if you thought you had had COVID, regardless of whether the serologic evidence supported it or not.
The researchers put both belief you had COVID and serologic evidence of COVID into a multivariable model, allowing them to compete, as it were, to see which, independent of the other, would associate more strongly with symptoms. Across the board, belief bested serology as a predictor of long COVID symptoms. Again, the implication: If thinking you had COVID is a better predictor of long COVID than actually having COVID, is long COVID even real?
But, as I alluded to earlier, there is a real problem with this analysis that was, I think, inadequately addressed in the paper. It has to do with the serologic test itself. The authors report that the serologic test they used had a sensitivity of 87% for detecting prior infection and a specificity of 97.5% — good numbers. But at the time this study was conducted, very few people in France had been infected — just 4% by the study accounting. Let’s do some math to figure out how the test characteristics interact with the disease prevalence.
The study included 26,823 individuals. Let’s assume that 4% had a prior COVID infection — that’s 1073 people. Given a sensitivity of 87%, only 933 of those people would be detected by the test. That leaves 140 false-negatives.


They would live somewhere in the serologically negative group. The authors, to their credit, point out that the false-negatives represent about 1% of the total serologically negatives — not enough to move the needle.
But no mention is made of false-positives. With 97.5% specificity, we can estimate that 644 individuals would test positive on serology despite never having COVID.

They would be found in the bottom row, and you can see that they are a big group relative to the size of this row overall. In fact, more than half of the serologic-positive group was probably a false-positive in this study.
That’s a real problem if we’re going to argue that serologic positivity is not a good predictor of long COVID — after all, half of our seropositive group never had COVID. That’s going to dilute your effect somewhat, no?
This wouldn’t be a problem if the prevalence of prior COVID infection was higher, so maybe a follow-up study would shed more light. But for now, I am in no way ready to say that long COVID is all in your head. Rather, this study may just be telling us that serologic testing for COVID is not as good as a patient’s recollection whether they had COVID or not — many of them had PCR tests at the time proving it, in fact — that’s something that you’re likely to remember.
To be honest, I’m a bit frustrated with how we’re handling long COVID right now. The case definition is bad, we have zero diagnostic tests, and papers like this may be used to argue it isn’t even a real problem. The truth is that long COVID definitely exists; I know many patients and friends who weren’t deathly ill from COVID and yet had long, lingering, debilitating symptoms. But we don’t know how common it is. We need to recognize that vague symptoms lead to vague diagnoses — and without clearer criteria, we risk labeling a bunch of people with “long COVID” when that’s not what they have at all. And that does a disservice to everyone because it makes it that much harder to make progress on this disease…whatever it is.


Does long flu exist? /would it if it had the vague criteria being used for long covid?

Reus's Large MEMBER

I am pretty sure that it does, having had pneumonia in the past myself (from party too hard and getting my body totally run down) I know that it took my a while to get over it, bearing in mind that I was a fit and healthy 23rd year old at the time. So I can only imagine the effect it would have on a overweight and unfit individual that does not have much get up and go to begin with.


I once attended a wedding in Bali. A group of us hired a villa with a pool.

After that holiday five or so of us were not 100% for a few months. One guy got blood tests and all. Symptoms were respiratory based and lathergic.

I suggest a number of viral infection s have long symptoms.

In 2004 I got what I think was the flu and was in bed for three weeks and then not right for another three.

It’s just my experience but the flu can be quite serious and linger.