The inventor of PCR (the Covid “test”), Nobel Laureate Kary Mullis, was very clear that PCR should not be used as a diagnostic tool. Here’s why:
PCR is Too Sensitive
The PCR “test” is a faulty diagnostic tool. It’s like weighing an elephant on a bathroom scale and concluding the elephant is fat.
The PCR process originated as a way to amplify or manufacture copies of DNA or RNA. Such a process was a boon to research as standardized (identical) copies of DNA or RNA could be shared amongst labs to be studied. It works by using temperature to break the DNA helix into two strands and then piecing it back together again to make two DNA molecules from the original one molecule. That is a single cycle. The process is run multiple times, each time doubling the amount of DNA. The WHO has recommended a Cycle Threshold of 45, meaning that if the threshold amount of DNA designated as a positive test occurs within 45 doublings, that is defined as a positive test. 245 is approximately 35 trillion! This means that with a cycle threshold of 45 the original amount of DNA has been multiplied by 35 trillion times! That is why it is like an elephant on a bathroom scale. The process is so sensitive that you will easily find false positives.
PCR is the Wrong Tool
If you walked around your house with an EMF meter and got near your wireless router and the needle starts moving up, you wouldn’t conclude that you have ghosts in your house, would you? No, because the meter measures EMFs, not ghosts.
The PCR test looks for genetic snippets, small strands of DNA. It does not test for viruses. The virus’s genome is said to be fully mapped and that snippet is supposed to be part of the genome. Don’t believe it. They have not isolated the virus. Koch’s postulates are common sense rules that were first formulated over 100 years ago to prove the existence of pathogens. Virologists rarely applies these simple, common sense rules and that is why their claims about viruses are questionable.
There are numerous other explanations for these genetic snippets to be found in the body: they are from other (possibly dead) bacteria or viruses; they are from dead cells or cells detoxifying; they are from other coronaviruses, not SARS-COV-2; they are from fungi; etc.
Biologists are aware of exosomes which are vesicles within the cell that are often transported out of the cell. There are thought to be many purposes for these exosomes, one of which is to protect the cells from toxins. (Learn more about exosomes here.) Exosomes contain genetic material and that is probably what the PCR tests are finding. There is no more reason to believe in a novel coronavirus than there is to believe in ghosts!
Conclusion
Even if the cycle threshold were placed at a more reasonable level, a positive test would still only be positive for some specific genetic sequence that has never been proven to be related to a new virus.
The World is Catching On to the Hoax
German tourists were detained in Portugal after testing positive for Covid-19. They were forced to stay in Portugal and to quarantine. The case went to court. The court ruled that the PCR was not proof that the tourists were infected.
It is interesting that the story was not covered in the US press. Instead, the case was covered by RT, Russian state media. See Landmark legal ruling finds that Covid tests are not fit for purpose. So what do the MSM do? They ignore it
“If a person has a positive PCR test at a cycle threshold of 35 or higher (as in most laboratories in the USA and Europe), the chances of a person being infected are less than 3%. The probability of a person receiving a false positive is 97% or higher ”.
“The possible reliability of the PCR tests carried out depends, from the outset, on the threshold of amplification cycles that they contain, in such a way that, up to the limit of 25 cycles, the reliability of the test will be about 70%; if 30 cycles are carried out, the degree of reliability drops to 20%; if 35 cycles are reached, the degree of reliability will be 3%.”
Further Reading:
English translation of Portuguese court ruling
Covid19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless
Coronavirus Truths: Part 2: Koch’s Postulates Not Being Used at All for COVID-19, Why?