Estimates of positive cases are meaningless!

BERLIN, Germany (PNN) - March 19, 2021 - 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 supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

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).

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 and the (Fascist Police States of Amerika).”

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 that have resulted in social panic, mass poverty and unemployment (allegedly to curtail the spread of the virus) have no justification whatsoever.

“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 and the FPSA), 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”.

Despite the WHO retraction, the PCR test is being used extensively to hike up the numbers with a view to sustaining the fear campaign, justifying 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.

National health authorities have issued (fake) warnings of a “Third Wave” as part of their propaganda campaign in support of the COVID-19 vaccine (which is not a vaccine by legal or medical definitions; it is a medical device designed to turn human cells into incubation chambers for pathogens).

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.

It should be understood that these “invalid estimates” are the “numbers” quoted relentlessly 24/7 by media in the course of the “First Wave” and “Second Wave”, which have been used to feed the fear campaign and justify all the unlawful policies put forth by governments.