The Hoax Is OVER (But Will They Let It Go?)

According to the latest WHO admission, the so-called “COVID test” is invalid. It’s in small print, buried on their website, of course, but it’s there. It’s all a hoax.

The whole industry and political scam of managing COVID and “protecting” us, is based on just one test: the PCR test (full name: Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) test for SARS-CoV-2 virus)

Let me start by explaining for you what that test does (and cannot do).

I like to use the example of a trombone (no, seriously!) If you took a trombone mouthpiece—which is a deep cup, quite unique to that instrument—and then replicated it one hundred times, one thousand, one million times… you still would not have a trombone. Just a string of mouthpieces.

Yet the shills are saying, brazenly, “No, it’s a trombone. A real trombone.”

By the same logic, no matter how many times you replicate a snatch of DNA, it’s still only a string of DNA bits, not a virus!

In testing the fragments of DNA are stacked up, deliberately. It’s called polymerizing and is how we make nylon and other synthetic materials. You get plenty of it to measure, but it’s NOT a virus! In fact the inventor of the PCR test, Kary B. Mullis, said the test cannot be used to measure viral load, which is crucial. 

In studying infectious diseases, the quantity of pathogens present is a measure of how likely a person is to spread the disease. Since quantity is being artificially inflated by concatenation (polymerization) it tells us nothing about the disease status.

Mullis actually stated: “Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron.” PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers.”¹

The PCR test was invented for, and used for, detecting an individual’s “DNA” present at a crime scene. That’s valid, though I do worry sometimes that we do not know enough to be absolutely SURE that someone else’s DNA cannot be strung together by accident. People have been jailed for life and even executed on the basis of this one, rather shaky, test.

Mullis was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1993 for his invention. He passed away in 2019, before the COVID crisis struck.

Enter German virologist Christian Drosten, based at Charité University Hospital, Berlin.² He fangled the COVID test on a computer and then had it tested on clinical cases. He didn’t have the virus. IN FACT NOBODY HAS, OR HAS HAD, THE VIRUS SINCE DAY 1. The “specimen” on which all the brouhaha is based came from China and, incredibly, even now, no validation has been performed by the authorship based on isolated SARS-CoV-2 viruses or full length RNA thereof.

Famously, the President of Tanzania rejected Drosten tests after a goat, a papaya, and engine oil tested positive. The apologists and shills have had trouble discrediting that one and the best they can come up with is “we don’t know what test was actually used.” Oh yes, we do!

And I have a BIG question: How did Drosten know, in January 2020, about the impending pandemic? It hadn’t happened yet. But according to Drosten and his pals, ” “The ongoing outbreak of the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) poses a challenge for public health laboratories… growing evidence that the outbreak is more widespread than initially thought, and international spread through travelers does already occur”.³

According to BBC News and Google Statistics³ there were 6 deaths world-wide on January 21st 2020 – the day when Drosten’s manuscript was submitted for publication. 6 deaths? A challenge to public health laboratories? There’s something very fishy here. In fact there is a strange smell everywhere you turn in this COVID narrative.

Incidentally, Drosten’s work was bankrolled by… guess who? Bill Gates and his Foundation. Odd how he turns up, every time there is crooked or twisted science.

Virology expert Professor Ian Mackay said claims that criticisms of COVID PCR test show “an extreme lack of understanding of PCR, PCR test design and use” and that PCR tests are “extremely effective at very sensitively and specifically detecting SARS-CoV-2”.

Well, professor Mackay is a liar (or a fool, which I doubt). The WHO has finally come clean. The PCR test is very far from specific and actually meaningless, due to large numbers of false positives. It is NOT “extremely effective”.

What The WHO Has Actually Said

The WHO confirms that the Covid-19 PCR Test is flawed, meaning that lockdowns and forced isolation have no scientific basis. Of course they don’t use such language, but that’s what they are saying. If we don’t know the true status of cases and numbers, we have no basis for entering recklessly and destructively into extreme measures to “control” it.

The contentious issue, as many of you know, pertains to the number of amplification threshold cycles (Ct). 

If the test is conducted at a 35 cycles or above (which was initially recommended by the WHO, based on Drosten, and paid for by you-know-who), segments of the SARS-CoV-2 virus cannot be detected. In case of virus detection, >35 cycles only detects signals which do not correlate with infectious virus as determined by isolation in cell culture, 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, more than 35 cycles has been the norm “in most laboratories in Europe & the US”.³ If a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used, the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%. Put the other way round: the probability that said result is a false positive is 97% !

The WHO, in a carefully worded qualification, which lets them off the hook, has tacitly admitted their mistake. According to new guidance, “careful interpretation” of weak positive results is needed. 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. [Jan 20 2021]⁴

Re-testing? That’s ridiculous, of course. It won’t happen. Millions of people Worldwide have already been tested with the Bill Gates-Christian Drosten table-top test, starting in early February 2020. Nonetheless, we must conclude that unless retested, those estimates are invalid, by the WHO’s own admission.  

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.

Michel Chossudovsky, an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), states baldly that “It’s a complex scam based on “a pack of lies” with devastating consequences.”

I wonder what he really thinks! (Haha! No place for jokes)

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

In the course of the last 14 months starting in early January 2020, Chossudovsky has analyzed almost on a daily basis the timeline and evolution of the COVID crisis. According to him, “From the very outset in January 2020, people were led to believe and accept the existence of a rapidly progressing and dangerous epidemic.”⁴

I leave Chossudovsky with the last word: “The Truth is a peaceful yet powerful weapon. Now is the time to confront those governments and demand a repeal of the lockdown policies which are triggering poverty and despair Worldwide.”

Makes me shudder but there you have the truth, such as it is!

To your good health,

References:

1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4172096/

2.  https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045

3. Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, Clare Craig, Kevin McKernan, et al, Review report Corman-Drosten et al. Eurosurveillance 2020. November 27, 2020

4. https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05

5. https://www.nexusnewsfeed.com/article/geopolitics/the-who-confirms-that-the-covid-19-pcr-test-is-flawed/