{"id":66510,"date":"2021-05-24T17:39:25","date_gmt":"2021-05-24T21:39:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/?p=66510"},"modified":"2021-05-24T17:40:04","modified_gmt":"2021-05-24T21:40:04","slug":"the-who-confirms-that-the-covid-19-pcr-test-is-flawed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/?p=66510","title":{"rendered":"The WHO Confirms that the Covid-19 PCR Test is Flawed"},"content":{"rendered":"

The WHO Confirms that the Covid-19 PCR Test is Flawed: Estimates of \u201cPositive Cases\u201d are Meaningless. The Lockdown Has No Scientific Basis<\/h1>\n

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
\nGlobal Research<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/div>\n

***<\/p>\n

The Real Time Reverse\u00a0Transcription\u00a0Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR)<\/i><\/strong> test was adopted by the WHO on January 23, 2020 as a means to\u00a0detecting the \u00a0SARS-COV-2 virus, following the recommendations of \u00a0a Virology research group (based at\u00a0<\/i>Charit\u00e9 University Hospital, Berlin),\u00a0<\/em>supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.<\/a> (For Further details see the Drosten Study<\/a>)<\/i><\/p>\n

Exactly one year later on January 20th, 2021, the WHO retracts. They don\u2019t say \u201cWe Made a Mistake\u201d.\u00a0<\/em>The retraction is carefully formulated. (See original WHO document here<\/a> as well as in Annex)<\/i><\/p>\n

While the WHO does not deny the validity of their misleading January 2020 guidelines, they\u00a0nonetheless recommend \u201cR<\/strong><\/i>e-testing\u201d<\/strong> (which everybody knows is an impossibility).<\/i><\/p>\n

The\u00a0contentious issue pertains to the number of amplification threshold cycles (Ct). According to\u00a0Pieter Borger, et al<\/p>\n

The number of amplification cycles [should be] less than 35; preferably 25-30 cycles.\u00a0In case of virus detection, >35 cycles<\/strong> only detects signals which do not correlate with infectious virus as determined by isolation in cell culture\u2026(Critique of\u00a0Drosten Study<\/a>)<\/p>\n

<\/i>The World Health Organization (WHO)\u00a0tacitly admits one year later that ALL PCR tests conducted at a 35 cycle\u00a0amplification\u00a0threshold (Ct) or higher are INVALID. But that is what they recommended in January 2020, in consultation with the virology team at Charit\u00e9 Hospital in Berlin.<\/p>\n

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\u00a0means that ALL the so-called confirmed \u201cpositive cases\u201d <\/strong>tabulated in the course of the last 14 months are invalid. <\/strong><\/p>\n

According to\u00a0<\/strong>Pieter Borger,\u00a0Bobby Rajesh Malhotra,\u00a0Michael Yeadon, et al, <\/a>the Ct > 35 has been the norm \u201cin most laboratories in Europe & the US\u201d.<\/p>\n

The WHO\u2019s Mea Culpa<\/strong><\/p>\n

Below is the WHO\u2019s carefully formulated \u201cRetraction\u201d. The full text with link to the original document is in annex:<\/p>\n

WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2<\/a> states that careful interpretation of weak positive<\/strong> results is needed (1<\/em>). The cycle threshold (Ct)<\/strong> needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient\u2019s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation,\u00a0a new specimen should be taken and retested<\/strong> using the same or different NAT technology. (emphasis added)<\/p>\n

WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases<\/strong> (2<\/em>). 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.<\/p>\n

\u201cInvalid Positives\u201d is the Underlying\u00a0Concept\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

This is not an issue of \u00a0\u201cWeak Positives\u201d<\/strong> and \u201cRisk of False Positive Increases\u201d. <\/strong>What is at stake is a \u201cFlawed Methodology\u201d which leads to invalid estimates.<\/strong><\/p>\n

What this admission of the WHO confirms is\u00a0that\u00a0the estimate of covid positive from a PCR test\u00a0<\/strong>(with an amplification threshold of 35 cycles or higher) is invalid<\/strong>.\u00a0In which case, the WHO recommends retesting: \u00a0\u201ca new specimen should be taken and retested\u2026\u201d.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The WHO calls for \u201cRetesting\u201d<\/strong>, which is tantamount to \u201cWe Screwed Up\u201d.<\/strong><\/p>\n

That recommendation is pro-forma. It won\u2019t happen. Millions of people Worldwide have already been tested, starting in early February 2020. Nonetheless,\u00a0<\/strong>we must conclude that unless retested, those estimates (according to the WHO) are invalid. \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

I should mention that there are several other related flaws regarding the PCR test which are not addressed in this article. (See Michel Chossudovsky\u2019s E-book<\/a>:\u00a0\u00a0The 2020 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d\u2019\u00c9tat and the \u201cGreat Reset\u201d<\/a>\u00a0 <\/strong>(Chapter III)<\/p>\n

\n

From the outset,\u00a0the 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 \u00a0the last 12-14 months led to the compilation of faulty and misleading Covid statistics.<\/p>\n

And these are the statistics which are used to measure the progression of the so-called \u201cpandemic\u201d.\u00a0Above an amplification cycle of 35 or higher, the test will not detect fragments of the virus. <\/strong>Therefore, \u00a0the official \u201ccovid numbers\u201d are meaningless.<\/strong><\/p>\n

It follows that there is no scientific basis for confirming the existence of a pandemic.<\/p>\n

Which in turn means\u00a0that 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.<\/p>\n

According to scientific opinion:<\/p>\n

\u201cif someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used<\/strong> (as is the case in most laboratories in Europe & the US), the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%<\/strong>, the probability that said result is a false positive is 97% \u00a0<\/strong>(Pieter Borger,\u00a0Bobby Rajesh Malhotra,\u00a0Michael Yeadon,\u00a0Clare Craig, Kevin McKernan, et al, Critique of\u00a0Drosten Study<\/a>)<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

As outlined above, \u201cthe probability that said result is a false positive is 97%\u201d: It follows that using \u00a0the >35 cycles detection will indelibly \u00a0contribute to \u201chiking up\u201d the number of \u201cfake positives\u201d.<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

Ironically, the flawed numbers based on \u201cinvalid positives\u201d<\/strong> are in turn being manipulated to ensure an upward trend in Covid positives.<\/p>\n

Moreover, those PCR tests are not routinely accompanied by a medical diagnosis of the patients who are being tested.<\/p>\n

And now, national health authorities have issued (fake) warnings of a \u201cThird Wave\u201d as part of their propaganda campaign in support of the Covid-19 Vaccine.<\/p>\n

The WHO confirms that the Covid PCR test procedure as applied is invalid. There is absolutely no scientific basis for implementing the Covid Vaccine.<\/p>\n

Both the WHO and the scientific assessment of Pieter Borger<\/strong>, et al (quoted above) confirm unequivocally that the tests adopted by governments to justify the lockdown and the destabilization of national economies are INVALID.<\/p>\n

Invalid Data and the Numbers\u2019 Game<\/strong><\/p>\n

It should be\u00a0understood that these \u201cinvalid estimates\u201d are\u00a0the \u201cnumbers\u201d quoted relentlessly 24\/7<\/strong> by the media in the course of the \u201cFirst Wave\u201d and \u201cSecond Wave\u201d, <\/strong>which\u00a0have been used to feed the fear campaign and \u201cjustify\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>ALL\u00a0the policies put forth by the governments: <\/strong><\/p>\n