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”.
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…”.
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.
From the outset, the PCR test has routinely been applied at a Ct amplification threshold of 35 or higher, following the January 2020 recommendations of the WHO. What this means is that the PCR methodology as applied Worldwide has in the course of the last 12-14 months led to the compilation of faulty and misleading Covid statistics.
And these are the statistics which are used to measure the progression of the so-called “pandemic”. Above an amplification cycle of 35 or higher, the test will not detect the virus. Therefore, the official “covid numbers” are meaningless.
It follows that there is no scientific basis for confirming the existence of a pandemic.
Which in turn means that the lockdown / economic measures which have resulted in social panic, mass poverty and unemployment (allegedly to curtail the spread of the virus) have no justification whatsoever.
According to scientific opinion:
“If someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the case in most laboratories in Europe & the US), the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, the probability that said result is a false positive is 97% (Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, Clare Craig, Kevin McKernan, et al, Critique of Drosten Study)
As outlined above, “the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%”: It follows that using the >35 cycles detection will indelibly contribute to “hiking up” the number of “fake positives”.
At the time of writing (mid-March 2021), despite the WHO retraction, the PCT test is being used extensively to hike up the numbers with a view to sustaining the fear campaign, justifying the ongoing lockdown policies as well as the implementation of the Covid vaccine.
Ironically, the flawed numbers based on “invalid positives” are in turn being manipulated to ensure an upward trend in Covid positives.
Moreover, those PCR tests are not routinely accompanied by a medical diagnosis of the patients who are being tested.
And now, national health authorities have issued (fake) warnings of a “Third Wave” as part of their propaganda campaign in support of the Covid-19 Vaccine.
The WHO confirms that the Covid PCR test procedure as applied is invalid. There is absolutely no scientific basis for implementing the Covid Vaccine.
Both the WHO and the scientific assessment of Pieter Borger, et al (quoted above) confirm unequivocally that the tests adopted by governments to justify the lockdown and the destabilization of national economies are INVALID.
Invalid Data and the Numbers’ Game
It should be understood that these “invalid estimates” are the “numbers” quoted relentlessly 24/7 by the media in the course of the “First Wave” and “Second Wave”, which have been used to feed the fear campaign and “justify” ALL the policies put forth by the governments:
- closure of economic activity,
- poverty and mass unemployment,
- social distancing,
- face mask,
- the vaccine.
Invalid Data. Think Twice Before Getting Vaccinated
And Now we have entered a so-called “Third Wave”. (But where’s the data??)
It’s a complex “pack of lies”.
It’s a crime against humanity. – GlobalResearch
PCR Test Results Only One Fact to Consider in Diagnosing Coronavirus
The WHO also cautions health care providers not to rely only on the results of a PCR test to detect the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but to “consider any result in combination with timing of sampling, specimen type, assay specifics, clinical observations, patient history, confirmed status of any contacts, and epidemiological information.”
In other words, just because a PCR test comes back positive for SARS-CoV-2 should not be the sole consideration for determining if someone has the virus. That determination, according to the WHO, should be based on an analysis of a broader range of factors. The WHO describes PCR test results as an “aid for diagnosis,” which suggests they are not the only piece of evidence that should be used to diagnose COVID-19.4 5
With its new guidance, reportedly the WHO is simply attempting to remind those who administer and evaluate the results of PCR tests to “use tests with the proper instructions to ensure accurate results.”12 Apparently, the WHO had received 10 reports of problems related to PCR tests. According to Reuters:
The WHO confirmed after investigating that the tests were not being used in compliance with instructions provided by the manufacturers. Laboratories faced problems when they did not apply the recommended “positivity threshold,” which can result in false negative or false positive results.12
The extent of the improper use of PCR tests by laboratories is unclear. There are questions, such as: Were many laboratories, for example, consistently running PCR tests at higher CTs than recommended by the thermocycler manufacturers? Virologist Ian M. Mackay, PhD of the University of Queensland in Australia says that laboratory technicians run PCR tests at 40 to 50 CTs.12 Another question: were many laboratories solely using PCR test results to determine whether or not someone is deemed to be a positive coronavirus case, rather than considering the broader approach spelled out in the WHO”s guidance?
All the WHO guidance suggests is that there was a problem with the way some laboratories were using PCR tests prior to Jan. 13 and that the guidance was part of an effort to address and correct it. There is no way to know how serious or widespread the problem was with PCR testing for COVID-19 cases yielding inaccurate COVID-19 test results.
Coronavirus Cases Start to Decline Sharply in U.S. and Around the World
What is interesting is that within days of WHO guidance being issued, the number of new coronavirus cases reported in the United States began to markedly decline. The New York Times reported on Jan. 22 that, “In recent days, coronavirus cases have been dropping steadily across the United States.”14 The newspaper stated on Feb, 17 that 70,176 new coronavirus cases were reported in the U.S. and, on Feb. 18, said, “Over the past week, there has been an average of 77,665 cases per day, a decrease of 43 percent from the average two weeks earlier.”13
On Feb. 1, the WHO announced at a press conference that coronavirus cases were dropping around the world.15 WHO director general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said:
For the third week in a row, the number of new cases of COVID-19 reported globally fell last week. There are still many countries with increasing numbers of cases, but at the global level, this is encouraging news.15
On Feb. 10, CNN reported that the WHO announced there had been a 17 percent decline from the previous week in the number of the coronavirus cases and the lowest number of cases since the week of Oct. 26, 2020.16
On Feb. 15, NBC News reported that, in the previous two weeks coronavirus cases had declined to “varying degrees in all 50 states, as well as in Washington, DC, Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands, and added:
Ten states and Puerto Rico saw a slight decrease between 10 and 25 percent. Forty states, plus the district and the Northern Mariana Islands, experienced a more significant decrease of 25 percent or more.17
On Feb. 17, The Atlantic published an article titled “COVID-19 Cases Are Dropping Fast. Why?”18 Staff writer Derek Thompson, offered four reasons for the rather sudden downward trend…
- Behavior: Maybe Americans finally got the hang of this mask and social-distancing thing.
- Seasonality: The coronavirus was perhaps destined to decline this time of year.
- Partial immunity: Is the virus running out of bodies?
- Vaccines: The shots work.
But worldwide, simultaneously?
In an interview CNN’s “Fareed Zakaria GPS” on Feb. 14, former CDC director Tom Frieden, MD said:
I don’t think the vaccine is having much of an impact at all on case rates. It’s what we’re doing right: staying apart, wearing masks, not traveling, not mixing with others indoors.18
I wonder. Might there not be something else at play here? – VaccineReaction.org