PCR Testing: 'Not Recommended For Primary Diagnostic'

PCR testing Issues:

Ethan Huff 

Just weeks before much of the world was forced into mandatory lockdown due to fears about the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19), the journal Eurosurveillance published a bogus study announcing the arrival of the infamous PCR test, which was declared to be the world’s first diagnostic tool for identifying the “coof.” Without question, the PCR test was immediately endorsed by World Health Organization (WHO) head Tedros Adhanom – the first non-medical leader of the United Nations arm, by the way – who pushed it as a reactive solution to the plandemic problem. Since that time, however, we have learned that PCR testing is fake science and completely fraudulent.

Study authors Dr. Christian Drosten from the European Union’s Center for Disease Prevention and Control, along with several colleagues from the Berlin Virology Institute at Charité Hospital and a small Berlin biotechnology company known as TIB Molbiol Syntheselabor GmbH, say they were somehow able to come up with an effective diagnostic test for COVID-19 just a few days after the novel virus was first identified in Wuhan, China. And much of the world believed them, including political leaders like German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, both of whom plunged their nations into a horror show of stay-at-home orders, mask mandates, and nonstop fearmongering.

President Donald Trump also declared a national emergency, though he has never pushed testing or mask-wearing. Even so, many state and local politicians embraced the narrative that PCR testing was necessary to identify “cases” of COVID-19, using this as justification to also impose mandatory lockdowns, mask restrictions, business closures, and other severe economic disruptors that have devastated our nation’s viability.

Roughly 10 months after this PCR testing study was published, 23 highly respected international virologists, microbiologists, and other scientists came out against it, calling on Eurosurveillance to immediately retract it. These experts also published their own peer-reviewed analysis of the study that completely deconstructs its false claims.

The review accused Drosten and his cohorts of “fatal” scientific incompetence, and their PCR test as fundamentally flawed. It also points out the fact that the original study was never peer-reviewed before being published in Eurosurveillance, peer review being the “gold standard” of credible science. The Corman-Drosten paper, as it is now being called, was submitted to the journal on Jan. 21, accepted for publication on Jan. 22, and published online on Jan. 23.

“RT-PCR is not recommended for primary diagnostics of infection,” they conclude. “This is why the RT-PCR Test used in clinical routine for detection of COVID-19 is not indicated for COVID-19 diagnosis on a regulatory basis,” they add.

Even more damning is the fact that the PCR test has no proper standard for identifying a positive or negative result. It does not even define the parameters for what would constitute a positive or negative result, which means the PCR test is basically a play-pretend diagnostic tool producing fake results in order to advance a nefarious, “Global Reset” agenda.