CDC withdraws fraudulent PCR testing protocol that was used to falsify COVID-19 “positives” to push the plandemic
by
Mike Adams and commentaries by Robert Gorter, MD, PhD.
July 25th, 2021
https://www.afinalwarning.com/538670.html
After more than a year of committing scientific fraud to push false “positives” via PCR testing, the CDC has announced it is withdrawing the RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel on December 31st of this year:
After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only. CDC is providing this advance notice for clinical laboratories to have adequate time to select and implement one of the many FDA-authorized alternatives.
The use of PCR tests for COVID-19 illness diagnosis is a global scientific fraud since no PCR instrument can produce quantitative results that might indicate a specific viral load. Yet this CDC-approved testing protocol was relied on to fabricate the “casedemic” illusion which pretended that hundreds of millions of people around the world were infected with COVID-19.
The entire thing was an elaborate quack science hoax, and anyone familiar with PCR technology (sees below) has known this from the very start.
The PCR testing approved by the CDC to diagnose COVID-19 was fraudulent from the very first day
PCR instruments are not quantitative instruments. They cannot tell you how much of something is present in a given sample. Every lab scientist familiar with PCR instruments knows this. Yet they continue to go along with the global fraud of diagnosing “positive” cases via PCR testing.
The entire COVID-19 “plandemic” has been based on fraudulent PCR testing, and now the CDC is announcing it is pulling the most frequently used test, perhaps in an effort to replace the test with yet another fraudulent protocol that can be controlled by health authorities to worsen the “pandemic” on-demand (or, perhaps, claim COVID-19 has been eliminated and declare victory).
From the very start, the entire pandemic has been nothing but a globally coordinated PCR testing fraud. As Thermo-Fischer sales representatives told me in face-to-face meetings, PCR instruments cannot determine quantitative results. They do not use quantitative instrument calibration curves or quantitative external COVID-19 standards. This means PCR instruments have no legitimate role in diagnosing any person with an illness or COVID-19 infections. The mere presence of a single viral fragment multiplied trillions of times through PCR cycling, does not indicate anything of scientific or diagnostic value.
A Portuguese appeals court has ruled that PCR tests are unreliable and that it is unlawful to quarantine people based solely on a PCR test.
The court stated, the test’s reliability depends on the number of cycles used and the viral load present. Citing Jaafar et al. 2020, the court concludes that:
“If someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the rule in most laboratories in Europe and the US), the probability that said person is infected is less than 3%, and the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%.”
Similarly, the Austrian court has ruled that PCR tests are not suitable for COVID-19 diagnosis and that lockdowns has no legal or scientific basis.
The court pointed out that “a PCR test is not suitable for diagnosis and therefore does not in itself say anything about the disease or infection of a person”.
PCR analysts and lab science technicians are complicit in the global COVID-19 testing fraud.
The entire COVID-19 pandemic is a farce, and it was all based on fraudulent PCR testing. Amazingly, even the PCR technicians and analysts all know this. They are taking part in a global scheme to destroy human lives and crush global economies, and they are fully aware that the limitations of their own instruments mean diagnoses of “positive” COVID-19 status based on PCR are meaningless.
I run multiple mass spec instruments in my private lab, including QQQ and ICP-MS instruments. I am the co-developer of two quantitative methods that were painstakingly developed for quantitating glyphosate molecules in food, and for cannabinoid concentrations in hemp extracts. I am intimately familiar with instrument calibration, external standards, curve fit equations, and quantitative analysis. PCR instruments are not capable of any of this. They are useless for diagnosing infectious diseases, as they cannot produce viral load concentration results from a given sample.
If you want to know how much of something is present in a given sample, you have to use far more complex instruments such as mass spec triple quad instruments (which is what I use to test foods for glyphosate contamination, among other things).
As Zero Hedge reports, even Dr. Fauci admits PCR testing is essentially a fraud when it comes to diagnosing COVID-19 illness:
Dr. Fauci, Head of the NIH who keeps pushing for global testing stated publically in mid-November, 2020: “What is now sort of evolving into a bit of a standard… if you get a cycle threshold of 35 or more … (and the Droste PRC test applies 40 cycles!) which is universally used to lock up people and forced upon them experimental injections), the chances of it being replication-confident are minuscule… 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 [a] 37 cycle threshold, but you almost never can culture virus from a 37 threshold cycle. …So, I think if somebody does come in with 37, 38, even 36, you got to say, you know, it’s just dead nucleotides, period.”
Just as doctors, nurses, and pharmacists are taking part in the global criminal COVID-19 scheme, PCR lab technicians and owners are gleefully participating in the same fraud, likely because they are earning huge profits from running fraudulent PCR tests that would never pass the scrutiny of any legitimate scientific test for accuracy or precision.
Christian Heinrich Maria Drosten (*1972) is a German virologist whose research focus is on novel viruses (emerging viruses). During the COVID-19 pandemic, Drosten came to national prominence as an expert on the implications and actions required to combat the illness in Germany. He invented the Life Time PCR with 44 cycles which met lots of criticism among colleagues as they all argued that a PCR with so many cycles will measure anything and is not meant to make clinical diagnoses. Nevertheless, Drosten and his fraudulent methods were pushed by the German government and the WHO.
In fact, PCR tests are neither accurate nor precise. The concept of “precision” — which is of utmost importance in quantitative lab analysis involving pesticides, heavy metals, and so on — does not exist in PCR equipment. There is no such thing as precision when one is multiplying genetic material in the sample itself. This process, by definition, destroys any meaningful knowledge of the mass or concentration in the original sample.
If the same approach were used in breathalyzer tests for possible drunk drivers, every living person would be arrested for a DUI, since there is at least one molecule of alcohol circulating in the blood of everyone.
The CDC is withdrawing this PCR method most likely because they know the test cannot withstand reasonable scientific scrutiny. They’re trying to cover their tracks and memory hole the fraudulent test that was used to drive the fake COVID-19 plandemic in the first place. But we already know the CDC is a criminal front for the vaccine industry and that the CDC has no scientific credibility or authority whatsoever when it comes to legitimate infectious disease testing.
The CDC, just like the PCR test, is a complete fraud.
Here follows the text of the original publication by the CDC:
07/21/2021: Lab Alert: Changes to CDC RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Testing
CDC’s Laboratory Outreach Communication System (LOCS)
Audience: Individuals Performing COVID-19 Testing
Level: Laboratory Alert
After December 31, 2021, the CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only. CDC is providing this advance notice for clinical laboratories to have adequate time to select and implement one of the many FDA-authorized alternatives.
Visit the FDA website for a list of authorized COVID-19 diagnostic methods. For a summary of the performance of FDA-authorized molecular methods with an FDA reference panel, visit this page.
In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test. CDC encourages laboratories to consider the adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. Such assays can facilitate continued testing for both influenza and SARS-CoV-2 and can save both time and resources as we head into influenza season. Laboratories and testing sites should validate and verify their selected assay within their facility before beginning clinical testing.
Opt in to receive updates from the CDC Laboratory Outreach Communication System (LOCS).
Online resources:
FAQ: CDC Distribution of COVID-19 Assays
Guidance for SARS-CoV-2 Point-of-Care Testing
Interim Guidance for SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Testing
Interim Guidelines for Collecting, Handling, and Testing Clinical Specimens for COVID-19
Frequently Asked Questions about COVID-19 for Laboratories
Information for Laboratories about COVID-19
CDC COVID-19 Website
Clinical Laboratory COVID-19 Response Weekly Calls
CDC Laboratory Outreach Communication System (LOCS)
If you have any questions, please contact us at LOCS@cdc.gov
Thank you,
The Laboratory Outreach Communication System
Laboratory Outreach Communication System (LOCS) | Division of Laboratory Systems (DLS)
Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services (CSELS)