PCR-Test Videos & Links

IN COVID-19 Vaccines

Just wanted to collect all interesting PCR-Test related videos & studies on one page.

Living Document. Started 2 July 2021. Last updated 8 July 2021

WARNING: Unlike the rest of my posts, videos featured on this post are still in the process of being fact-checked and referenced. Whilst this notice is in place, consider some things may be “opinion, false, or hypothesis”. I will remove this notice once references are complete, sorting fact from fiction.

Quick Explainer: 2 Minute Video giving rundown on PCR-Tests (01)

PCR tests cannot determine an acute infection, ongoing infectiousness, and actual disease, especially if ct values are not taken into account. – The Trouble With PCR Tests – Swiss Policy Research (02)

A French Study (June, 2021) has shown that when the PCR test is run at 25 cycles, about 70% of samples were genuinely positive (infectious). 

However, when the test is run at a threshold of 30 cycles, only 20% of samples were infectious. 

At 35 cycles, only 3% of samples were infectious.

And when run above 35 cycles – Zero samples were infectious.. (03)

A USA Cross-Country Analysis (April 2021) has shown that national PCR testing rates have had no influence at all on covid mortality(04)

A German study (June 2021) re-analyzed PCR tests of 160,000 people and concluded “In light of our findings that more than half of individuals with positive PCR test results are unlikely to have been infectious”. (05)

The FDA issued a Press Release (May 19, 2021) FDA Advises Against Use of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test Results to Evaluate Immunity or Protection From COVID-19, Including After Vaccination (06)

Kevin McKernan – R&D lead Human Genome Project at MIT/WIBR – publishes PCR-related ‘explainers’ criticizing how the PCR-test is being used during this ‘Pandemic’:

The Live-Dead qRT-PCR problem, the testing industrial complex and its impact on society. (07)

We are now ruled by qPCR right and the transparency on the process is shameful. Kevin’s explainers: (08) (09) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17)

I never thought the work I did for the human genome project would be weaponized to lock down society.Kevin McKernan

The New York Times (Aug 2020) did an extensive piece investigating various labs and PCR-Test Protocols throughout the USA. Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be. (18)    

“I’m shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive,” she said. Julia Morrison, a virologist at the University of California. “A more reasonable cutoff would be 30 to 35“.

Harvard epidemiologist, Dr. Michael Mina: “upwards of 90% of positive tests in Massachusetts with a 40 Ct threshold would have been negative at 30 Ct

Many US labs work with 35 to 45 cycles, (19) while many European labs work with 30 to 40 cycles. (20)

Response to NY Times article from the perspective of a hospital COVID testing laboratory (Source: Yale) saying they “need to do it” “just in case” (21)

 The CDC (Dec 2020) was still recommending 40 cycles. (22)

A UK study (Dec 2020) published in the British Medical Journal found that 58% of positive tests at the University of Birmingham were false positives(23)

COVID-19 positive cases down 62% since World Health Organization updated PCR guidance – Feb 21, 2021

A Canadian study (May 2020) reported no positive viral cultures with a Ct > 24. (24)

The Kansas Department of Health and Environment’s Health and Environmental Laboratories (Jan 2021) reduced (25) the cycle threshold for its real-time COVID-19 test from 42 to 35 cycles.

KHEL (Oct, 2020) said their most commonly-used test “has a Ct cutoff of 42 and is the most sensitive assay [test] currently available.” (expand screengrab below)

KHEL (Jan 7, 2021), reduced the Ct cutoff to 35, and the last half of that sentence omitted.(26)

Click to Expand (Screenshot comparing Changes)

“Cycle thresholds between 12 and 36 are considered positive;

results between 36 and 40 cycles are considered marginally positive,

and anything over 40 cycles is considered negative.”

Bioningentech Manual (one of the manufacturers of the COVID PCR-Tests)

Corman-Drosten Review Report – Curated By An International Consortium Of Scientists In Life Sciences (Icsls) (Nov 2020 – Jan 2021)

External peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false positive results. (27)

Swiss Policy Research keeps updating their The failure of PCR mass testing page with the latest studies. (28)

“PCR Tests are useless at detecting COVID-19 … but very good at keeping us under house-arrest”

Dr. Vernon Coleman

PCR-Tests are the centrepiece to this entire pandemic. Not only do we keep going into ‘lockdown’ and have our movements tracked because of PCR-Testing, but all the ‘case-counts & death-counts’ depend on these tests. New powers have been given to governments and other companies, our economy is ruined, emergency laws enacted, rights-surrended, jobs-lost, elderly dying alone, kids in masks, billions of tax-payer funded federal government spending, needing to go into quarantine – even if you are not infectious, and most importantly: the experimental vaccine efficiency data was “approved” because of these tests – EVERYTHING – Every part of this WHOLE pandemic centres around this PCR-Test.

It is known by everyone – governments, media, virologists, labs, scientists, doctors, the World Health Organization, the CDC, the FDA, lawyers, and even talked about on mainstream media, and so most of the general public would know that they are unreliable as well – and yet it’s significance in producing false-results – it’s inaccuracy – and it’s use on asymptomatic people is insanity and only serves in a way to produce fear-mongering headlines, which cause the people to demand their own lockdowns, and cause a division of discrimination and finger-pointing amongst the population, and used by governments to promote ‘vax the nation’ campaigns, and the forced-vaccination of these experimental still-in-trial vaccines to our front-line workers – is being downplayed or dismissed. Billions have been invested because of the results of these tests. Dedicated Quarantine Centres are being built, Laboratories being built, Laws are being changed. Why?

2021

July 3 2021

Tonia Buxton – GBNews.uk – misspoke some numbers but shares the devastation the inaccurate PCR tests are causing which is unnecessarily creating a Two Tier Society (29)

  1. Claim:
    “It’s a two-tier society – There’s lots of people that don’t want the jab, or can’t have the jab – and some people that don’t need the jab, there are some people brimming with antibodies and we’re not looking at that.”
  2. Claim:
    … “great concern about pushing vaccinations onto children that they don’t need..”
  3. Claim:
    … “Average Life-Expectancy in UK is 81.5 years
    … “Average Age of those who “Died of COVID-19” is 82 years
  4. Claim:
    COVID-19 Blown way out of proportion: Scare-mongering.
  5. Claim:
    I’ll say a thousand times “These TESTS are NOT Correct”
  6. Claim:
    “Asymptomatic Tests done on 10 million people – Not just Rare – but “Impossible”
    Locked away from our families on a ‘whim – on a guess’.
  7. Claim:
    “Suicides & Urgent Medical treatment delayed”
    “More deaths caused by Lockdown than COVID-19”

Fact-Checked Claims to provide more accurate context (click title to expand)

Long-term & Pre-Existing Antibody Immunity

  • Mortality data & COVID-19 – March 28, 2021 – Joel Smalley (Quantitative Data Analyst) | PDF (36)

Children extremely low-risk & unlikely to spread

  • The mortality profile of the covid-19 coronavirus is essentially zero for children and young adults
    • near zero below 50
    • begins to rise slowly and then very steeply above 70
    • and especially above 80, reaching extreme levels in nursing homes. (37)

  • Children are unlikely to cause household COVID-19 clusters or be major drivers of the pandemic even if attending school.
    • Interventions aimed at children are expected to have a small impact on reducing SARS-CoV-2 transmission.” – Clinical Infectious Diseases, March 2021 (39)

  • USA, UK, Italy, Germany, Spain, France, South Korea deaths from COVID-19 in children remain rare up to February 2021, at 0.19 per 100 000 population, comprising 0.54% of the estimated total mortality from all causes in a normal year.” (40)

  • COVID-19 vaccination in children – major ethical concerns | PDF (49)
  • Covid policies and harms to children | PDF (50)

Zero impact on life expectancy

  • UK – The average age of death for COVID-19 is 82.4, higher than the average age of death from other causes (81.5). (51)
  • In most countries, the median age of covid deaths was close to the average life expectancy or even slightly above (e.g. 78 years in the USA and 80 to 86 years in western Europe).
  • Therefore, despite high excess mortality in some countries, the temporary impact on life expectancy in 2020 was limited: it ranged from zero (in countries hardly affected by the coronavirus) to minus 2.1 years in US males: (52) (53)

COVID-19 Blown way out of proportion

  • Because of the covid-19 mortality profile, mass PCR testing and contact tracing in the general population make little sense and create an additional “casedemic” on top of the pandemic. (55)

Tests are NOT correct

Everything in this post backs up this claim. Here are some additional resources:

  • A team of 22 international scientists published a review challenging the scientific paper on PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 demanding it be retracted due to “fatal errors,”
  • One of which is the fact that it was written, and the test itself developed, before any viral isolate was available.
  • The test is simply based on a partial genetic sequence published online by Chinese scientists in January 2020. “China gave them a genetic sequence with no corresponding viral isolate to validate it”. (56)

  • Test results are often misinterpreted, particularly if the prevalence of the condition being tested for is very low – British Medical Journal (58)

  • Fragments of inactive virus can be persistently detected by PCR in respiratory tract samples following infection – long after a person is no longer infectious. (59)

No Symptoms, Not Infectious

  •  If you have no symptoms, your chances of being infectious and spreading the infection to others is basically nil. Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening in nearly ten million residents of Wuhan, China – Nature.
    • Of these, not a single person who had been in close contact with an asymptomatic individual ended up testing positive.
    • This study even confirmed that even in cases where asymptomatic individuals had had an active infection, and had been carriers of live virus, the viral load had been too low for transmission. (60)

  • A study published back in April 2020 observed a significant relationship between Ct value and culture positivity rate.
    • Samples with Ct values of 13–17 all led to positive culture.
    • Culture positivity rate then decreased progressively according to Ct values to reach 12% at 33 Ct. (62)

  • Only very weak studies show asymptomatic spread. Given that asymptomatic spread assumptions drive all of the other non-clinical interventions (mass-testing of healthy people, mandatory wearing of masks, social distancing and lockdowns), the evidence here must urgently be re-evaluated by policymakers. PDF (64)

Deaths caused by Lockdown

Suicides due to COVID-19 Lockdowns

  • A Peru study found a substantial drop in violent crime rates (close to 50% in some cities), and a reduction in traffic accidents, but an increase in domestic violence reports and suicides related to economic hardship as well as a result of the lockdown – Nov 2020 (67)

  • COVID-19-Related Suicides in Bangladesh Due to Lockdown and Economic Factors: Case Study Evidence from Media Reports (May, 2020): (68)

    • On 6 April, an adult man (aged 30 years) from Mohespur Upazila in Jhenaidah committed suicide (by hanging himself) due to the pressure of unpaid debts. In addition, his family was half-fed and had starved for a week after losing work after the lockdown and was denied any financial support from local government authorities (United News of Bangladesh 2020).

    • On 10 April, a female adolescent (aged 10 years) from Belkuchi municipality of Sirajgonj committed suicide (by hanging herself) because she was rebuked by her father for asking for food. The lockdown meant that the girl’s father had to close his small loom factory and the family therefore had no money. The whole family had starved for a couple of days and they were also denied any financial relief from the local government authorities (Kaler Kantho 2020a).

    • On 12 April, a woman and mother of five children (aged 35 years) from Cox’s Bazar attempted suicide by hanging, although one of her sons rescued her by getting help from her neighbors. Her husband lost his job because of the lockdown and they were also ineligible to receive relief goods from the local government authorities. The mother could not bear to see her starving children’s faces and thought that by killing herself she could provide more food for her starving children (Campus Today 2020).

    • On 13 April, a young adult man (aged 27 years) from Noldangga village in Natore committed suicide (by hanging himself). He was a day laborer and he became unexpectedly unemployed as a result of the lockdown. He was struggling with starvation and to compound the situation, his wife also left him (prior to the pandemic) and the loneliness made his living situation worse (Kaler Kantho 2020b).

    • On 14 April, a woman (whose age was not reported) from Dhamrai in Dhaka attempted suicide and kill her two children by setting themselves on fire with kerosene oil. Her husband became unemployed due to the shutdown of a garment factory where he worked and the mother was unable to work in a tea shop where she and her father-in-law worked. Consequently, the family experienced economic hardship. Additionally, she was asked by her father-in-law to leave the house with husband and children (RisingBD 2020a).

    • On 16 April, an adult man (aged 30 years) from Bashkhali Upazila in Chattogram committed suicide (although no details of how were reported). The man was an auto-rickshaw driver and was unable to earn any money for his family because he was unable to use his vehicle to earn money during the lockdown. He approached the local government authorities for financial relief but was denied because they claimed there were other more deserving cases for financial help than his own (Daily Star 2020a).

    • On 24 April, a poverty-stricken husband (aged 30 years) and wife (aged 24 years) from Keshapur committed suicide both hanging themselves from the roof of their house due to lockdown-related economic distress. The couple had a 3-year-old child and the family were very poor. The local government authority reported that the suicides were due to existing debts made worse by the national lockdown (Manab Zamin 2020).

  • Alleged that a woman committed suicide at a hospital because she was not treated and because doctors and nurses suspected she was infected with COVID-19 and did not want to get infected themselves. Dec 2020 (70)

  • Several Indian celebrities committed suicide during this COVID-19 pandemic: (71)
    • Ashutosh Bhakre on 30th July 2020.
    • Actress Chandana, committed suicide on 28th May 2020 following relationship challenges
    • Susheel Gowda, committed suicide in the first week of July 2020
    • Sushant Singh Rajput (SSR), a popular mainstream Bollywood actor also committed suicide on June 14, 2020
    • Two Tamil actors (Sreedhar & Jaya Kalyani) committed suicide in June 2020. These two actors were brother-sister were going through financial crisis due to lockdown related job loss
    • A TV actor Manmeet Grewal also committed suicide by hanging due to stress of financial loss during this COVID-lockdown. It has been reported that people resisted themselves, to rescue the actor, when his wife shouted for help, due to the suspicion that the actor might have COVID-19 infection.

  • 16 COVID-19 related suicide cases in one month in Pakistan.
    • Most of the suicides occur due to lockdown-related economic recession.
    • Fear of infection is the second suicide contributing factor.
    • Lockdown-related unemployment aggravates the life-threatening situation. (72)

  • 69 COVID-19 related suicide cases (aged 19 to 65 years; majority males) from Mar 27 2020 to May 18 2020. The suicide causalities are included as follows:
    • fear of COVID-19 infection (n=21)
    • followed by financial crisis (n=19)
    • loneliness, social boycott and pressure to be quarantine
    • COVID-19 positive
    • COVID-19 work-related stress
    • unable to come back home due to lockdown
    • unavailability of alcohol etc. (73)

  • Couple-suicides and attempted suicides relating to COVID-19 from four countries (i.e., Bangladesh, India, Malaysia, and the US): (74)

    • (April 2, 2020; Source – BBC, 6 April 2020 ): An American couple from Lockport, Illinois – Patrick Jesernik (aged 54 years) and partner Cheryl Schriefer (aged 59) – were involved in a COVID-19-related murder-suicide by gunshot. Mr. Jesernik shot his partner (who had been suffering from severe breathing problems) before killing himself. He was scared that he had been infected with COVID-19 from his girlfriend. Both had been tested for COVID-19 but it appears neither had received their results before their deaths. The autopsies showed that neither was infected with COVID-19.

    • (April 2, 2020: Source – Hindustan Times, 6 April 2020 ): An Indian elderly couple from Amritsar, India – Balwinder Singh (aged 65) and his wife Gurinder Kaur (age not reported) – committed suicide by consuming a poisonous substance together. Their suicide note said there was tension because of COVID-19. Their suicide note simply said: “We are finishing our lives. No one is responsible for this. There has been a tension due to coronavirus. We both were also ill”. The police reported they were not actually infected with COVID-19.

    • (April 4, 2020: Source – New Indian Express, 5 April 2020 ): At Tiruchy International Airport, India, a Malaysian couple – Subramaniam (aged 65) and his wife Lalitha (aged 55) – both attempted suicide together by swallowing sleeping pills because they were not provided seats on a special COVID-19 rescue flight back to their home country of Malaysia. They were told by airport officials that their names were not listed on the flight and were dismayed by the responses from embassy officials and attempted to take their own lives. The suicide attempt was prevented by the police.

    • (April 16, 2020: Source – Telegraph India, 17 April 2020 ): A young newlywed couple from Uttarakhand, India – Ashok Kumar (aged 24) and his wife Rajju Devi (age nor reported) – both committed suicide together by hanging themselves from a tree. Mr. Kumar was quarantined (after returning from Punjab) at a school that had been turned into an isolation center near his village. Although he had no COVID-19 symptoms, he was prevented from going home and his wife was being pressured and harassed by neighbors to leave the village because they all thought Mr. Kumar had COVID-19. The wife visited her husband at the quarantine center and both felt the situation was hopeless so committed suicide together in a forest nearby the center.

    • (March 4, 2020: Source – Deccan Herald, 4 May 2020 ): A man from Bihar, India – Ramesh Shah (aged 35) – committed suicide by hanging himself after his wife (Suman, age not reported) committed suicide by setting herself on fire. The couple were unable to pay back a loan on a truck they had bought because they were unable to work during the COVID-19 lockdown. After an argument concerning their finances, Suman deliberately set herself on fire. The husband tried to save his wife but she died at hospital. The husband was so distraught that he then killed himself. The couple left behind two young children (aged 7 and 10)

Lockdowns serve no useful purpose and cause catastrophic harms

  • Ethical considerations of the COVID-19 response – By Professor David Seedhouse (Professor of Deliberative Practice) | PDF – March 29, 2021 (76)

  • Aged Care homes – we must do better for the most vulnerable in society – Dr Ali Haggett | PDF (77)

  • Lockdowns have never previously been used in response to a pandemic.
    • They have significant and serious consequences for health (including mental health), livelihoods and the economy.

  • Businesses have closed, never to reopen and livelihoods have been lost. (82)

  • Whilst the focus continues to stay primarily on COVID-19, the health of our nation is beleaguered by the collateral damage of this approach.
    • In mental health, in elective surgeries cancelled and in the delicate structure of society. PDF (83)
    • Physical contact is essential for human beings. We are social animals. To deny people this for long and undefined periods causes enormous psychological and physical harm which we are clearly witnessing throughout the nation, in every corner of society. (84) (85)
    • This is alongside the economic and societal implications, not to mention the long-term effects of lost educational years on our young people. (86)

June 29 2021

PCR test cycles are different depending on vaccination status. Clip with Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying. June 29, 2021 (87)

February 10, 2021

Covid-19: Behind the PCR Curtain – Let’s dig deeper into PCR tests once again and have a look behind the curtain of this Covid-19 pandemic – Dr Sam Bailey (94)

2020

September 9 2020

Positive PCR Test. Is It Really Positive? Drbeen Medical Lectures (113)

Click to Expand

The screenshot DrBeen took in Sept 2020 of the CDC document, was updated Mar 16, 2021 (114) with the following:

Recommendations

  1. Duration of isolation and precautions
    • For most adults with COVID-19 illness, isolation and precautions can be discontinued 10 days after symptom onset* and after resolution of fever for at least 24 hours, without the use of fever-reducing medications, and with improvement of other symptoms.
      • Some adults with severe illness may produce replication-competent virus beyond 10 days that may warrant extending duration of isolation and precautions for up to 20 days after symptom onset; severely immunocompromised patients** may produce replication-competent virus beyond 20 days and require additional testing and consultation with infectious diseases specialists and infection control experts.
    • For adults who never develop symptoms, isolation and other precautions can be discontinued 10 days after the date of their first positive RT-PCR test result for SARS-CoV-2 RNA.
  2. Role of viral diagnostic testing (RT-PCR or antigen)***to discontinue isolation or precautions
    • For adults who are severely ill or severely immunocompromised, a test-based strategy could be considered in consultation with infectious diseases experts.
    • For all others, who are not severely ill or severely immunocompromised, a test-based strategy is not recommended, and isolation and precautions should be maintained for at least 10 days as outlined in Part 1 above.
  3. Viral diagnostic testing (RT-PCR or antigen)***and quarantine after discontinuation of isolation or precautions
    • For adults previously diagnosed with symptomatic laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who remain asymptomatic after recovery, retesting or quarantine is not recommended if another exposure occurs or might have occurred within 90 days after the date of symptom onset from the initial SARS-CoV-2 infection.
    • For adults who develop new symptoms consistent with COVID-19 during the 90 days after the date of initial symptom onset, if an alternative etiology cannot be readily identified by a healthcare provider, then the adult likely warrants retesting. Consultation with infectious disease or infection control experts is recommended, especially in the event that symptoms develop within 14 days after close contact with a person infected with SARS-CoV-2. Adults being evaluated for reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 or any potentially transmissible respiratory infection should be isolated under recommended precautions before and during evaluation. If reinfection is confirmed or remains suspected, they should remain under the recommended SARS-CoV-2 isolation period until they meet the criteria for discontinuation of precautions – for most adults, this would be 10 days after symptom onset and after resolution of fever for at least 24 hours, without the use of fever-reducing medications, and with improvement of other symptoms.
    • For adults with past laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 who have never had symptoms and have had a subsequent exposure or possible exposure, the date of first positive viral diagnostic test result (RT-PCR or antigen) for SARS-CoV-2 should be used in place of the date of symptom onset to determine the interval between past infection and the recent exposure. This interval can then be used to inform decisions about testing for the recent exposure.
    • Adults who have  a past history of symptoms consistent with COVID-19 but who did not have laboratory confirmation of COVID-19 with a viral diagnostic test (RT-PCR or antigen) and who present with new symptoms consistent with COVID-19 should  be tested and undergo quarantine.
    • For children and infants, the data pertaining to the risk of reinfection within 90 days following laboratory-confirmed diagnosis are extremely limited. However, in the context of a pandemic, children and infants should be managed as recommended for adults above. CDC will continue to monitor closely the evolving science for information that would warrant reconsideration of these recommendations for this population.
  4. Role of serologic testing
    • Although serologic testing indicating the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies may signify resolving or previous infection, it should not generally be used to establish the presence or absence of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. In addition, the date of a positive serologic test should not generally be used to determine the start of the 90-day period following SARS-CoV-2 infection for which retesting or quarantine is not recommended. However, if no positive viral diagnostic test (RT-PCR or antigen) indicating infection is available, a positive serologic test 7 days to 3 weeks following acute illness onset in an adult with a history of a previous negative serologic test can be used to establish the presence of absence of infection and the start date of the 90-day period.

September 2 2020

Why Are Covid-19 Cases Soaring In NZ? PCR Test Update – Dr Sam Bailey talks about what is happening in NZ in regards to COVID-19 and important information you should know about the COVID-19 PCR Test. (120) (121)

July 17 2020

The PCR-COVID test run at 36 cycles or higher is ‘dead nucleotides’. Interview with Dr Anthony Fauci – July 17, 2020 (129)

If you get a cycle threshold of 35 or more, that the chances of it being replication-competent are miniscule.

So that if somebody – and you know what we do – we have patients, and it’s very frustrating for the patients – as well as for the physicians – somebody comes in, and they repeat their PCR, and it’s like 37 cycle-threshold, but you never – you can almost never can culture virus from a 37 threshold cycle.

So I think if somebody does come in with 37, 38, even 36. you gotta say y’know it’s just …it’s just dead nucleotides, period.”Anthony Fauci - 17 Jul 2020

April 20 2020

Using Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) in COVID-19 Testing
Animation from Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory’s DNA Learning Center takes an authoritative look “under the hood” of COVID-19 testing. (35-45 cycles of PCR) (132)

Click to Expand

April 15 2020

Professor Stephen Bustin is an expert on quantitative PCR, and his research focuses on translating molecular techniques into practical, robust and reliable tools for clinical and diagnostic use. In this interview, he talks about the Challenges with RT-PCR (133)

Click to Expand

RT-PCR is the main method for declaring that someone is COVID-19 infected or not, as well as having numerous other uses in molecular biology research and biological testing.

Professor Stephen Bustin is a world expert on the technology, and the potential problems with using it to produce accurate and repeatable results.

Although the coronavirus test is presented as a binary test, it is actually based on whether the production of DNA is detectable prior to an arbitrary number of PCR cycles.

If there is variability in the quantification, then samples will be above or below the limit, when they should not be, resulting in false positives and negatives.

David and Stephen walk through the steps, from the extraction of RNA from the original sample, the conversion of the RNA to complementary DNA, and duplication of DNA using PCR, and the optional step of sequencing.

While this is dense technical information at times, it is presented logically, and the limitations of this method cannot be understood without taking the cover off the black box.

2007

40 Second Video: The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique as explained in an older film on AIDS by Gary Null (2007) (140) (141)

This revolutionary technique allows scientists to take a sample containing a very minute amount of DNA and replicate that DNA sequence until there are many copies. One of the first applications of PCR was to analyze human tissue to detect the presence of HIV. PCR is commonly used in medical and biological research labs for the detection of virus culture in infectious persons.

Kary Mullis (1944 – 2019) PhD, Biochemist, invented & patented the PCR-test. He actually won a Nobel Prize because of the technology. (142)

1993 – 1996

Kary Mullis (inventor of PCR-Test) answers: “How do they misuse PCR to estimate all these supposed free viral RNA’s that may or may not be there?(143) (144)

“It’s just a process used to make a whole lot of something out of something. That’s what it is. It doesn’t tell you that you’re sick and it doesn’t tell you that the thing you ended up with was going to hurt you or anything like that.”Kary Mullins - 1993

Dr Kary Mullis was not a fan of Anthony Fauci or the CDC. (145)

Click to Expand (Transcript)

What is it about humanity that it wants to go to the all detail to stop and listen. Guys like Fauci get up there and start talking, and he doesn’t know anything really about anything, and I’d say that to his face. Nothing.

The man thinks you can take a blood sample and stick it in an electron microscope and if it’s got a virus in there, you will know it. He doesn’t understand electron microscopy and he doesn’t understand medicine. He should not be in a position like he’s in.

Most of those guys up there on the top are just total administrative people and they don’t know anything about what’s going on with the bottom. You know, those guys have got an agenda, which is not what we would like them to have, being that we pay for them to take care of our health in some way.

They’ve got a personal kind of agenda. They make up their own rules as they go. They change them when they want to and a smugly like Tony Fauci does not mind going on television in front of the people, face out, and lie directly into the camera.

You can’t expect the sheep to really respect the best and the brightest. They don’t know the difference, really. I mean, I like humans, don’t get me wrong. But basically, there is a vast, vast majority of them do not possess the ability to judge who is and who isn’t really a good scientist.

That’s a problem, that’s a main problem actually with science, I’d say, in this century. Because science is being judged by people. Funding is being done by people who don’t understand it. Who do we trust? Fauci? Fauci doesn’t know nothing, you know.

If Fauci wants to get on television with somebody who knows a little bit about this stuff and debate him, he could easily do it because he’s been asked. And I’ve had a lot of people… President of the University of South Carolina asked Fauci if he can come down there and debate me on the stage in front of the student body because I wanted somebody who was from the other side to come down and balance my point, because I felt like, “Well, these guys can listen to me but I need to have somebody else down here that’s going to tell me the other side.” But he didn’t want to do it.

Dr Kary Mullins – 1996 Fauci (146)

They’ve got a personal kind of agenda. They make up their own rules as they go. They change them when they want to and a smugly like Tony Fauci does not mind going on television in front of the people, face out, and lie directly into the camera.Dr Kary Mullins - 1996

PCR came about right about the same time as HIV: (147)

PCR came about right about the same time that HIV did…. That was the only way to see it (except for culture, which was a long, protracted procedure which a lot of times didn’t turn up the right result)… The whole method… Cell biology is a “bunch of magic” half the time…People that say they can do quantitative estimations of HIV from cultures are fooling themselves.Kary Mullins - 1996

Kary Mullins: “the number of cases went up for HIV because the number of tests went up(148)

The number of cases reported went up epidemically, exponentially because the number of tests that was done went up exponentially. How many doctors knew about HIV in 1983? Two. How many knew about it in 1985? Say 500. How many knew about it in 1986? 40,000. So that’s where the curve came from. How many tests were done.Kary Mullins - 1996
The CDC hadn’t had a good plague since polio. Their funding was probably going to be cut back if they didn’t come up with one. The guy that was the head of the CDC, in fact wrote memos that have been obtained, you know, where he describes this as “hot stuff”. You know, those guys have got an agenda, which is not what we would like them to have being that we pay for them to take care of our health.Kary Mullins - 1996

Kary Mullins compares the lab-coat-scientists on TV to something of a religion in its own right: (149)

And they are considered the final arbiters of what’s good for the planet or what’s bad for the planet. And they haven’t got the slightest idea. Instead of wearing white robes, they wear white lab coats, you know, instead of like bringing you the word of God, they bring the word of the, the EPA or whatever, and they don’t have to understand what it is that they’re making you do, in fact, and people, you know, just, I think they fall naturally into it because there is a need in humanity for something like a religion.Kary Mullins - 1996

Watch the full interview: (150) (151)

PCR COVID-19 ( search results for site: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov )
(yet to sort through and correctly interpret / date & cite – unknown if any of these are relevant)

Click to Expand (PCR COVID-19 search on Pubmed)

  • RT-PCR/MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry-based detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva specimens.
    J Med Virol. 2021 May 8. doi: 10.1002/jmv.27069.
  • Stability issues of RT-PCR testing of SARS-CoV-2
    In this study, we collected a total of 610 hospitalized patients from Wuhan between February 2, 2020, and February 17, 2020. We reported a potentially high false negative rate of real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2 in the 610 hospitalized patients clinically diagnosed with COVID-19 during the 2019 outbreak.
  • Dynamic profile of RT-PCR findings from 301 COVID-19 Patients
    This large-scale investigation with 1113 RT-PCR test results from 301 COVID-19 patients showed that the average contagious period of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients was 20 days. Longer observation period and more than 2 series of negative viral test are necessary for patients ≥65 years.
  • Real-time RT-PCR in COVID-19 detection: issues affecting the results
    In conclusion, according to the mentioned reasons, the results of real-time RT-PCR tests must be cautiously interpreted. In the case of real-time RT-PCR negative result with clinical features suspicion for COVID-19, especially when only upper respiratory tract samples were tested, multiple sample types in different time points, including from the lower respiratory tract if …
  • Diagnosing COVID-19: The Disease and Tools for Detection
    Due to the shortage of kits and false negative rate of RT-PCR, the Hubei Province, China temporarily used CT scans as a clinical diagnosis for COVID-19. 47 Chest CT scans are non-invasive and involve taking many X-ray measurements at different angles across a patient’s chest to produce cross-sectional images. 
  • The impact of false positive COVID-19
    The UK’s COVID-19 testing programme uses real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests to detect viral RNA. 1 Public Health England reports that RT-PCR assays show a specificity of over 95%, meaning that up to 5% of cases are false positives. 2 The impact of false positive results includes risk of overestimating the COVID-19 incidence, the demand on track …
  • SARS-CoV-2 Testing | COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines
    (https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/overview/sars-cov-2-testing/)
    Testing for SARS-CoV-2 Infection. Summary Recommendations. To diagnose acute infection of SARS-CoV-2, the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel (the Panel) recommends using a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) with a sample collected from the upper respiratory tract (i.e., a nasopharyngeal, nasal, or oropharyngeal specimen) 
  • NCBI Insights : Novel coronavirus complete genome from the …
    Get rapid access to Wuhan coronavirus (2019-nCoV) sequence data from the current outbreak as it becomes available. We will continue to update the page with newly released data. The complete annotated genome sequence of the novel coronavirus associated with the outbreak of pneumonia in Wuhan, China is now available from GenBank for free and easy…
  • The Relationship Between Positivity for COVID-19 RT-PCR …
     This study aimed to assess the correlation between nucleic acid amplification test (real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, RT-PCR) positivity of patients presenting with suspected COVID-19 and pneumonic infiltration consistent with COVID-19-specific pneumonia diagnosis on thoracic computed tomography (CT), with symptoms, laboratory findings, and clinical …
  • Systematic screening for COVID-19 associated 
    From all adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), TA samples were collected twice a week for Aspergillus screening by PCR and or culture. Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) sampling was performed in patients with a positive screening result if possible.

Click to Expand (Bullet point list of links at the top of this page)

  • PCR tests cannot determine an acute infection, ongoing infectiousness, and actual disease, especially if ct values are not taken into account. – The Trouble With PCR Tests – Swiss Policy Research (152)
  • A French Study has shown that when the PCR test is run at 25 cycles, about 70% of samples were genuinely positive (infectious).  However, when the test is run at a threshold of 30 cycles, only 20% of samples were infectious.  At 35 cycles, only three percent of samples were infectious. And when run above 35 cycles – Zero samples were infectious.. (153)
  • Several studies have since shown that national PCR testing rates have had no influence at all on covid mortality. (154)
  • A study published in June, 2021 re-analyzed PCR tests of 160,000 people and concluded “In light of our findings that more than half of individuals with positive PCR test results are unlikely to have been infectious”. (155)
  • Many US labs work with 35 to 45 cycles, (156) while many European labs work with 30 to 40 cycles. (157)
  • Kevin McKernan – R&D lead Human Genome Project at MIT/WIBR – The Live-Dead qRT-PCR problem, the testing industrial complex and its impact on society. I never thought the work I did for the human genome project would be weaponized to lock down society. We are now ruled by qPCR right and the transparency on the process is shameful. (158) (159)
  • FDA document, May 19, 2021: FDA Advises Against Use of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test Results to Evaluate Immunity or Protection From COVID-19, Including After Vaccination – FDA Press Release (160)
  • From the New York Times Exposé: “I’m shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive,” she said. Julia Morrison, a virologist at the University of California. “A more reasonable cutoff would be 30 to 35“. Harvard epidemiologist, Dr. Michael Mina: “upwards of 90% of positive tests in Massachusetts with a 40 Ct threshold would have been negative at 30 Ct(161)    
  • For those that don’t have access to the NY Times Exposé where they contacted various labs, interviewed virologists, and did an analysis on what is considered positive and informed the public to the fact that it could be 90% false-positive reporting: Response from Yale PDF Summary from Yale (162)
  •  The CDC was still recommending 40 cycles as recently as December 1, 2020. (163)
  • British Medical Journal – Dec 2020 found that 58% of positive tests at the University of Birmingham were false positives(164)
  • COVID-19 positive cases down 62% since World Health Organization updated PCR guidance – Feb 21, 2021
  • A study published May 2020 reported no positive viral cultures with a Ct > 24. (165)
  • The Kansas Department of Health and Environment’s Health and Environmental Laboratories reduced (166) the cycle threshold for its real-time COVID-19 test from 42 to 35 cycles. In October of 2020, KHEL said their most commonly-used test “has a Ct cutoff of 42 and is the most sensitive assay [test] currently available.” On January 7 2021, the Ct cutoff was changed to 35, and the last half of that sentence omitted.(167)
  • “Cycle thresholds between 12 and 36 are considered positive; results between 36 and 40 cycles are considered marginally positive, and anything over 40 cycles is considered negative.” – Bioningentech Manual (one of the manufacturers of the COVID PCR-Tests)
  • Corman-Drosten Review Report – Curated By An International Consortium Of Scientists In Life Sciences (Icsls) [Nov 2020 – Jan 2021] – External peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false positive results. (168)
  • The failure of PCR mass testing – Swiss Policy Research (169)

VIDEOS I STILL HAVEN’T FACT-CHECKED

Jan 9 2021 (NOT FACT-CHECKED YET)

  • I’ll review/fact-check and post tomorrow Dr.David Rasnick-PCR Test
  • David William Rasnick, PhD is an American biochemist with over 40 years experience, 20 years in the pharmaceutical/biotech industry.
  • Feb 12 2021 – Dr David Rasnick – PCR Test Meaningless

Date Unknown (Still Need to Locate Original Source) – Added to this post today, July 6th, 2021 (NOTE: I HAVE NOT Fact-Checked this video yet)

PCR Test Breakdown

I’ll add notes and source later (today I’m working on the legal stuff which has suddenly taken a higher priority than everything else) – I know it’s Del BigTree from HireWire – need to

References[+]

Penny... on Health
Penny... on Health

DISCLAIMER: The information on this website is not medical science or medical advice. I do not have any medical training aside from my own research and interest in this area. The information I publish is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease, disorder, pain, injury, deformity, or physical or mental condition. I just report my own results, understanding & research.