The WHO Confirms that the Covid-19 PCR Test is Flawed: Estimates of “Positive Cases” are Meaningless. The Lockdown Has No Scientific Basis

The Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) test was adopted by the WHO on January 23, 2020 as a means to detecting the  SARS-COV-2 virus, following the recommendations of  a Virology research group (based at Charité University Hospital, Berlin), supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (For Further details see the Drosten Study)

Exactly one year later on January 20th, 2021, the WHO retracts. They don’t say “We Made a Mistake”. The retraction is carefully formulated. 

While the WHO does not deny the validity of their misleading January 2020 guidelines, they nonetheless recommend “Re-testing” (which everybody knows is an impossibility).

The contentious issue pertains to the number of amplification threshold cycles (Ct). According to Pieter Borger, et al

The number of amplification cycles [should be] less than 35; preferably 25-30 cycles. In case of virus detection, >35 cycles only detects signals which do not correlate with infectious virus as determined by isolation in cell culture…(Critique of Drosten Study)

The World Health Organization (WHO) tacitly admits one year later that ALL PCR tests conducted at a 35 cycle amplification threshold (Ct) or higher are INVALID. But that is what they recommended in January 2020, in consultation with the virology team at Charité Hospital in Berlin.

If the test is conducted at a 35 Ct threshold or above (which was recommended by the WHO), segments of the SARS-CoV-2 virus cannot be detected, which means that ALL the so-called confirmed “positive cases” tabulated in the course of the last 14 months are invalid.

According to Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, et al, the Ct > 35 has been the norm “in most laboratories in Europe & the US”.

The WHO’s Mea Culpa

Below is the WHO’s carefully formulated “Retraction”. The full text with link to the original document is in annex:

WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology. (emphasis added)

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.

“Invalid Positives” is the Underlying Concept 

This is not an issue of  “Weak Positives” and “Risk of False Positive Increases”. What is at stake is a “Flawed Methodology” which leads to invalid estimates.

What this admission of the WHO confirms is that the estimate of covid positive from a PCR test (with an amplification threshold of 35 cycles or higher) is invalid. In which case, the WHO recommends retesting:  “a new specimen should be taken and retested…”.

The WHO calls for “Retesting”, which is tantamount to “We Screwed Up”.

That recommendation is pro-forma. It won’t happen. Millions of people Worldwide have already been tested, starting in early February 2020. Nonetheless, we must conclude that unless retested, those estimates (according to the WHO) are invalid.  

Keep reading

University Suspends Over 700 Student IDs After They Failed to Submit Covid Test Results

Approximately 718 undergraduate, professional and graduate students at the University of Michigan found their ID badges were deactivated Monday following a campus health department assessment.

According to The Blaze:

The university requires all students who live, work, or learn on campus to undergo weekly coronavirus testing as a part of its “Community Sampling and Tracking Program.”

The students were notified about their new restricted status in an email after it was discovered that they had used their cards recently but had not completed a COVID-19 test in four or more weeks or did not have a prior test on file.

As student “Mcard” ID badges are required to enter virtually all buildings on campus, the suspension effectively prevents students from attending in-person classes.

Keep reading

New Lancet Article Suggests 50-75% of “Positive” PCR Tests Are Not Infectious People

The Deputy Medical Officer of Ontario, Canada, Dr. Barbara Yaffe recently stated that COVID-19 testing may yield at least 50 percent false positives. This means that people who test positive for COVID may not actually have it. Former scientific advisor at Pfizer, Dr. Mike Yeadon,  argued that the proportion of positive tests that are false may actually be as high as 90%.

Furthermore, 22 researchers have put out a paper explaining why, according to them, it’s clear that the PCR test is not effective in identifying COVID-19 cases, and that as a result we may be seeing a significant amount of false positives. You can read more about that here.

These are simply a few of many examples from the recent past, and it’s concerning because lockdown measures and more are based on supposed positive “cases.”

Another concern recently raised comes from an article  published in The Lancet medical journal titled “Clarifying the evidence of SARS-CoC-2 antigen rapid tests in public health responses to COVID-19.”

Keep reading

Another Woman’s Brain Lining Punctured While Being Nasal Swabbed for COVID

Last fall a woman’s brain lining was punctured during a COVID nasal swab test. The injury caused brain fluid to drip down one of her nostrils.

In December, it was reported that saliva tests for COVID are as accurate as nasal swabs.  Nevertheless, nasal swabs are still being used for testing and another woman’s brain lining was penetrated in the process.  This caused fluid to drip down her nose too.

Keep reading

WHO changed virus test parameter the day Biden took office

On Jan. 20, 2021, the WHO (World Health Organization) posted an important bulletin regarding polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing for COVID-19. What else happened on 20 January that was important? That’s right. It was the very same day Joe Biden was sworn in as the 46th president of the United States. But I’m sure the WHO release was purely coincidental.

LifeSite News claims that the notice was released one hour after Biden took office. Although I can’t confirm that exact time, the WHO guidance bulletin is dated Jan. 20, 2021.

This “new” guidance will change everything, and it has caused me not just to say, but to scream, SEE I TOLD YOU SO! The reason is that I and many others uncovered these facts many months ago – that the COVID tests were far too sensitive and that the WHO apparently was suppressing this information out of both fear and for political gain.

Keep reading

WHO (finally) admits PCR test is potentially flawed

In careful bureaucratic language, they are essentially admitting that PCR tests were not meant to be used diagnostically, and cannot be relied upon to do so accurately. Just as Dr Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test, said himself many times.

Understand this. The PCR test is virtually the ENTIRE foundation of the Covid narrative. Without it you have nothing but healthy people and the normal winter flulike illnesses. Every ‘case’ you read about is only a case because of a PCR test.

We and others have been saying since at least June that the PCR test is scientifically meaningless. And now, by degrees the WHO is admitting it too.

Keep reading

Right On Cue For Biden, WHO Admits High-Cycle PCR Tests Produce COVID False Positives

Were the ‘conspiracy theorists’ just proven right about the “fake rescue plan” for COVID?

Did the ‘science-deniers’ just get confirmation that it was political after all?

The short answer to both of these questions regarding the COVID-19 ‘casedemic’ and the fallacy of asymptomatic PCR testing is YES and YES!

Keep reading