Every Scary Thing You’re Being Told Depends on the Unreliable PCR Test

Home / COVID19 / Every Scary Thing You’re Being Told Depends on the Unreliable PCR Test
COVID: ‘Every Scary Thing You’re Being Told Depends on the Unreliable PCR Test’

by News Wire, 2st Century Wire
December 30, 2020


Since the COVID-19 crisis began, all of the WHO and Government so-called ‘mitigation’ policies – lockdowns, social distancing, masks, shutting schools etc, have all been based on data of coronavirus “cases” gathered from the increasingly dubious PCR Test. Despite its many fundamental flaws – and even an warning by its inventor, Nobel Prize winner Kerry Mullis, who explicitly said not to use his test as a diagnostic for any virus – governments, the medical establishment, and even Dr Anthony Fauci himself, have chosen to base their entire COVID ‘pandemic’ narrative on this highly inaccurate testing regime. 

The following video presentation is a summary of the pitfalls of the PCR Test and why no responsible medical professional or public health official should be treating it as a legitimate medical diagnostic tool, but rather only, as Mullis himself instructed, as an auxiliary ‘research aid’. Research links for this video have been provided below.


Kary Mullis criticising Fauci:

Dr Mike Yeadon: Cases, Admissions, Deaths, ALL Hang on the Unreliable PCR Test!

Prof. Carl Heneghan: PCR Test Positives Up to 78 Days After Having Had the Virus

Zoom conference with Fauci:

Dr Mike Yeadon Government are using a Covid-19 test with undeclared false positive rates:

EP 91 Emeritus Professor of Immunology Reveals Crucial Viral Immunity Reality:

Reveals Crucial Viral Immunity Reality:


Review report Corman-Drosten et al. Eurosurveillance 2020:

Pathologist Claire Craig on the PCR test:

Kary Mullis 1993:

Interview with Prof. Stephen Bustin:

Carl Heneghan Giving Evidence to House of Commons Committee:


An essential problem that many PCR tests have is called the “cycle quantification” (Cq), also know as the “cycle threshold” (Ct), these two different terms are explained here:

The Cq/Ct value specifies how many cycles of DNA replication are required to detect a real signal from biological samples. As it says in the MIQE guidelines (https://bit.ly/2T5Wpm2) “Cq values higher than 40 are suspect because of the implied low efficiency and generally should not be reported.”

MIQE stands for “Minimum Information for Publication of Quantitative Real-Time PCR Experiments”, a set of guidelines that describe the minimum information necessary for evaluating publications on Real-Time PCR, also called quantitative PCR, or qPCR.

The inventor of the PCR test himself, Kary Banks Mullis, agreed, when he stated: “If you have to go more than 40 cycles to amplify a single-copy gene, there is something seriously wrong with your PCR.” Source for the above quote: https://bit.ly/346XeRY

The MIQE guidelines have been developed under the guidance of Stephen A. Bustin, Professor of Molecular Medicine, a world-renowned expert on quantitative PCR and author of the book A-Z of Quantitative PCR which has been called “the bible of qPCR (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Bustin). According to Bustin, a Cq in the 20s to 30s should be aimed at and there is concern regarding the reliability of the results for any Cq over 35. If the Cq value gets too high, it becomes difficult to distinguish real signal from background, for example due to reactions of primers and fluorescent probes, and hence there is a higher probability of false positives.

PCR Test unable to distinguish between signals from dead or live viruses: “Molecular techniques based on real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) allow the detection and quantification of DNA but are unable to distinguish between signals from dead or live cells.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4889745/ (archive: https://archive.is/x5gak)

Covid19 PCR Tests are scientifically meaningless:
https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/covid19-pcr-tests-are-scientifically-meaningless/ (archive: https://archive.is/R4gPW)

The Trouble With PCR Tests:
https://swprs.org/the-trouble-with-pcr-tests/ (archive: https://archive.is/g1PKx)

PCR as “Useless Testing”:
http://eu-chronicle.eu/2020/08/useless-testing/ (archive: https://archive.is/IF4yS)

Was the Covid-19 test meant to detect a virus?
https://uncoverdc.com/2020/04/07/was-the-covid-19-test-meant-to-detect-a-virus/ (archive: https://archive.is)

Corona: creating the illusion of a pandemic through diagnostic tests:
https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/04/08/corona-creating-illusion-of-pandemic-through-diagnostic-test/ (archive: https://archive.is/noPQz)

Are you infectious if you have a positive PCR test result for COVID-19?
https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/infectious-positive-pcr-test-result-covid-19/ (archive: https://archive.is/sv06K)

BBC: Coronavirus: Tests ‘could be picking up dead virus’:
(archive: https://archive.vn/vx6JG)



[Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: The PCR tests are being completely misused when looking for cause of infectious disease.  In the case of Covid19, they are looking for a virus that has never been isolated — meaning they are looking for something not known to exist outside of a computer model. To say that a certain number of cycles, as stated by several in this video, will help in determining who is infectious, makes no sense at all. Exactly what are they looking for when the virus itself has never been isolated? Kary Mullis, inventor of the PCR test, tried to make it very clear that this test could not be used for determining infectious disease. Add that to the questions about the role of viruses in infectious disease and the entire convoluted narrative falls apart. The Covid19 narrative is fraud to the bone. To understand the unfolding truth revelations, see the work of Jon Rappoport, Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Tom Cowan, Dr. Zach Bush, and many others whose work we share here. ~ Kathleen]

Print Friendly, PDF & Email