A PUBLIC sector trade union in Cyprus has called for the suspension of rapid lateral flow tests after analysis found contamination with a toxic chemical.
Cyprus-based Food Allergens Lab found 0.36 mg/kg of ethylene oxide in one swab, more than seven times the limit of 0.05 mg/kg allowed by EU regulations.
According to the European Chemicals Agency, ethylene oxide is carcinogenic and mutagenic, including when inhaled. It is used to coat and sterilise PCR and rapid test nasal swabs.
A separate analysis by A-D Research Foundation in California found aluminium and silicon at concentrations as high as 7.25 per cent and 14.06 per cent respectively in some spots on PCR test swabs. The author, Peter Grandics, says that aluminium and silicon can both be hazardous to health, and suggests this may explain the ‘rapid-onset nasal bleed and strong and lasting adverse reactions reported by the tested individuals’.
It follows concerns about why the bristles in LFT swabs so easily break away and remain in the body, as shown in this video.
As reported in the Daily Sceptic in August, Professor Anthony Brookes and Dr Kees Straatman from the University of Leicester put some material from a LFT swab under a powerful laser microscope and sent us the videos showing what they found. They explained:
‘To shed further light on the bristle structure of the swabs provided in LFT testing kits, we examined examples via confocal microscopy. The bristles were easy to separate from the swab itself, about 15 micrometres in diameter (the size of a large nucleus in a human cell), and clearly comprised an outer tube layer with an inner filling. The inner material does not seem to exude or flow or deviate from a cylindrical shape when the bristles are dissected, and so we would provisionally conclude this inner material is solid or semi-solid in nature.’
In his paper, Peter Grandics is scathing about the standards of the manufacturers:
‘Our results revealed a disturbing pattern of noncompliance with regulatory requirements, combined with the lack of concern for the well-being of test subjects. It is ironic that the medical establishment that now strives to control human health is incapable of producing a safe and simple product in conformance with current regulatory standards.’
Considering how widely these tests are being used and how often, Government ought to be taking much greater interest in how safe they are for human use.
This first appeared in the Daily Sceptic on October 27, 2021, and is republished by kind permission.
