Anonymous – CANADA

2 mins read

Dear Panda;

Thank you for your excellent initiative! Below is an account of my perspective, which highlights the double-standards that we are living with.

The extreme measures that Governments around the world have taken to attempt to control the Covid-19 virus have solely been based on case numbers.

Positive case counts have been considered valid without question, so much so that daily case numbers (and subsequent numbers of deaths) have been released to the general public every single day. The uncertainty inherent in the testing process, however, has not been disclosed at all!

As a geologist who works with assay sample data, I know that uncertainty exists when testing entities that are nanometres in scale. Errors are expected and mitigated against by means of the use of very specific Quality Control (QC) samples. In fact, the Resource Industry is regulated by specific Laws where we MUST report QC data to the general public whenever we release a model based on assay sample data. Quality Control samples monitor for all measures of human, instrumentation and inherent sources of errors—errors are surprisingly common.

Quality control samples include control blanks, duplicates, repeats, certified reference material and standardization of detection limits.

Laws, designed by our own governments, ensure that we report uncertainty relating to sample contamination, lack of precision and accuracy. This same level of transparency and fanaticism for data clarity about Covid-19 samples has not been delivered to the general public—we have a right to see the QC data.

I firmly believe that data uncertainty should be reported along with daily case and death counts. This knowledge would have added a much-needed dose of moderation in the minds of the general public, who have been entranced with the worst-case scenario mantra for almost a year.

If comprehensive and whole-scale QC data has not been performed on all Covid-19 tests, then the claim on the voracity of Covid-19 cannot be proved. We have a right to know if QC sampling has been done.

For further details see:

Yours faithfully,
A Citizen

Publisher’s note: The opinions and findings expressed in articles, reports and interviews on this website are not necessarily the opinions of PANDA, its directors or associates.

Share this article


By entering your email address and clicking “Submit,” you agree to receive updates from PANDA about our work. To learn more about how we use and protect your personal data, please view our privacy policy.
Scroll to Top


As a non-profit organisation, PANDA’s work remains free of bias and conflicts of interest. Support our work with a monthly donation which aids our planning and resources, and enables societies that are healthy, functioning and resilient.. We rely on your financial support to keep the conversation open.

We value your privacy

We use cookies and similar technologies to improve your experience of our website, to collect anonymous statistics, and to keep our site reliable and secure.By clicking “Accept,” you consent to the use of cookies on this site. For more information, see our privacy policy.

We Rely On Your Financial Support

Every donation, big or small, will help us continue to discover, explore, plan, reach and impact more. Donate and be a part of Panda.